THE ORIGINS OF PIG DOMESTICATION

with particular reference to the Near East

i

by

Berrin Kusatman

A thesis presented to the University of London in

fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of

Doctor of Philosophy

| Institute of Archaeology

! University College London September 1991 ABSTRACT

The purpose of this research is to shed light on the question of the origin of pig domestication, at least as regards the Near

East. To find out when and where the domestication of this animal first occurred, whether the origin of its domestication was a single event occurring in one part of the world and spreading from there to other regions, or whether it was an event which

occurred several times in several places in the world, is clearly an interesting matter for debate. In order to be able to answer these questions in relation to the Near East, large numbers of modern samples of known age and sex are first examined and discriminating criteria elucidated for application to archaeological material. Then, pig remains from a large archaeological sequence are examined on the basis of these well tested criteria.

Metrical studies based on a large modern wild pig sample from

Hakel in East Germany show that some measurements are more variable than others and suggest which measurements to select to

investigate the origin of pig domestication. Among the measurements tried in this current research, tooth width

measurements are the most reliable dimensions since they show low sexual dimorphism, low age-related variation and low individual

variability. The examination of modern populations from various parts of the world on the basis of the well tested criteria shows that there is a range of variation in size between the samples of wild pig

(Sus scrofa).

Reliable measurements from several archaeological sites of different periods and regions are compared with those of modern wild pig samples and pig remains from different archaeological periods from the same region. The result of the comparisons suggests that pigs were domesticated during the 7th millennium BC in different regions of the Old World; at least in the Near East, in eastern Europe and in the Far East. The present research draws special attention to the southeastern Taurus in Turkey as this area provides the earliest evidence for the domestication of this animal, possibly sometime between 7250-6750 BC at Cayonii and certainly around 6500-6250 BC at Gritille and Hayaz. CONTENTS

CHAPTER I Page No

Introduction ...... 1

CHAPTER II

1. Materials ...... 9

1.1. Modern Material ...... 9

1.2. Archaeological Material ...... 10

2. Methods...... 12

CHAPTER III

1. Evolutionary History of Suidae and the Phylogeny of Sus. Wild Pig...... 24

2. Subspecific Classificationof Sus scrofa ...... 25

3. Geographical Variation andDistribution of Sus scrofa .... 32

4. Diagnosis, Ecology and Behaviour of Sus scrofa ...... 33

CHAPTER IV

Variation in Skeletal Elements Within a Wild Pig Population...... 40

1. Material ...... 40

1.1. Cranial Elements ...... 40

1.2. Postcranial Elements ...... 41

2. Analyses ...... 42

2.1. Ageing the Wild Pig Population from Hakel According to Tooth Eruption and Wear...... 42

2.2. Sequence and Timing of Epiphysial Fusion of Wild Pigs from Iran...... 45

iii 2.3. Components of Variation in Wild Pig Samples from Hakel and Iran...... 47

2.3.1. Age-related Variation ...... 48 2.3.2. Sex-related Variation...... 50 2.3.3. Individual Variation ...... 51

3. Discussion ...... 65

CHAPTER V

Variation in Skeletal Elements between Wild Pig Populations... 71

Modern Examples ...... 71

1. Ziguinchor, West Africa...... 72 2. Tunisia ...... 72 3. Spain ...... 72 4. Italy ...... 73 5. France ...... 73 6 . Netherlands ...... 73 7. Germany ...... 74 8 . Austria ...... 75 9. Hungary ...... 75 10. Poland ...... 75 11. Czechoslovakia ...... 76 12. Romania ...... 76 13. Turkey ...... 76 16. Israel ...... 77 14. Iraq ...... 77 15. Iran ...... 78 17. India ...... 78 18. West Siberia ...... 79 19. China ...... 79 20. Sumatra ...... 79

2. Discussion ...... 108

CHAPTER VI

Zooarchaeological Applications ...... 122

Archaeological Examples ...... 122

1. Turkey

1.1. Erbaba/Suberde ...... 123 1.2. Cayonii ...... 124 1.3. Gritille ...... 127 1.4. Hayaz Hoyiik ...... 129 1.5. Kumartepe ...... 130 1.6. Amouq ...... 131

2. Lebanon

Ksar ' Akil ...... 133

3. Israel

3.1. Kebara ...... 134 3.2. Hatula ...... 136 3.3. Ha y o n i m...... 136 3.4. Netiv Hagdud ...... 136 3.5. Ein Gev ...... 137 3.6. Salabiyah ...... 137 3.7. Nahal Oren ...... 138 3.2. Yiftah el ...... 138 3.9. Jericho ...... 139 3.10. Abou Gosh ...... 140 3.11. Beisamoun ...... 141 3.12. Hunhata ...... 142 3.13. S e f unim...... 143 3.14. Neve Yam ...... 143 3.15. Tell Dan ...... 144 3.16. Nahal Betzetz ...... 144 3.17. Tell Tao ...... 145

4. Jordan

Ain Ghazal ...... 146

5. Syria

5.1. Mureybet ...... 147 5.2. Ramad ...... 148 5.3. Tell As wad ...... 149 5.4. Umm Qesir ...... 150

6 . Iran

6.1. >Tepe Asiab ...... 151 6.2. Sarab ...... 152 6.3. Siahbid ...... 153 6.4. Dehshavar ...... 154 6.5. Ganj Dareh ...... 155

v 6 .6 . All Kosh ...... 156 6.7. Tepe Sabz ...... 156 6 .8 . Hajii Firuz ...... 157

7. Iraq

7.1. Palegawra ...... 158 7.2. Karim Shahir ...... 159 7.3. M'lefaat ...... 159 7 .4 . Jarmo ...... 160 7.5. Gird Banahilk ...... 162 7.6. Matarrah ...... 164

8 . Discussion ...... 178

CHAPTER VII

Summary and Conclusions ...... 203

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ...... 214

BIBLIOGRAPHY ...... 215

APPENDIX

vi CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

Domestication could be described as the close relationship between man and other animal species and their becoming to some extent dependent on each other. Animals which are in a close relationship with man and cosequently show gene pool changes are called domestic and those with which the relationship is distant or imperceptible are called wild. Difficulties arise, however, as soon as we attempt to define the categories

precisely. The relationships between man and other vertebrates are varied and "wild" forms can emerge by a series of

imperceptible stages into domestic varieties. Therefore, numerous

factors which have a direct bearing on man-animal relationships

must be considered in order to be able to define these two

categories (Hicjgs and Jarman, , 1972).

The problem is greatest when we attempt to discover the origin of

domestication. The criteria which have been used to detect

prehistoric domestication can generally be divided into two main

classes: The first employs physical characteristics of the

animals involved such as size, morphology, etc. The second

concerns the demography and the ecology of the exploited animal

population and the evidence of the way in which they were culled

including analyses of sex ratios, mortality, survival pattern and

the ecological fitness of the animals in relation to the local

biotope.

1 Artifactual and artistic data are also useful as a potential

further source of information. Archaeozoologists must be

extremely careful in the criteria they use to differentiate

between wild and domestic forms. Most of the criteria by which

domestication has been claimed to be recognizable may occur as

.the results of processes which have nothing to do with

domestication (Berry,1969).

It is often argued that human protection and selective breeding

of chosen groups of animals will result in increased variability

in size and morphology within a population. It is assumed that

early domestication was accomplished by the isolation of small

numbers of animals from the parent wild population, with

subsequent maintenance of a sexual-genetic barrier between the

wild and domestic population and that this was the major factor

in the initiation of the physical changes which occurred.

♦ However, there are some doubts as to whether or not isolation in

itself does give rise to change. Certainly, many isolated

populations, such as those on islands, do undergo changes

relative to their parent populations (Poster,1964). However,

it is questionable whether or not it is isolation rather than a

change in selective pressures which causes the observed changes

to take place (Higgs and Jarman, 1972).

In fact, size and morphology are affected by many different

factors, but nevertheless it is possible to generalize as

regards the reasons for differences in size and morphology and

2 separate them into three main categories:

1. Environmental (climate / human interference),

2. Genetical

3. Age-related

Attention to animal domestication has been concentrated on the late Pleistocene and early Holocene, a time when major climatic changes were occurring. Size changes through time may be explained according to Bergmann's Rule, which states that in geographically variable and warm-blooded species, body size averages are larger in cooler parts of the range of the species

(Mayr,1963). Therefore, a simple temporal correlation between a size change and the apparent introduction of a new method of exploiting the animal concerned does not necessarily imply that the two are linked by a relationship of cause and effect although this may, sometimes, be the case (Jarman and Wilkinson,1972). If the change is in fact genotypic, it may be the result of immigration or the introduction of new breeding stock, or of change within the population caused by genetic drift or by selection (Payne,1972). Size and morphology are highly variable even within a single population in relation to age, sex and range of individuals.

Another group of criteria used for separating prehistoric wild and domestic animals is that of the demographic characteristics of the exploited segment of the population. Mortality data are used which rely on the rates of tooth eruption and wear and characteristics of epiphysial fusion to provide age at death estimates in those species. Sex ratios have been employed in this fashion less frequently because it is often impossible to work out techniques for separating the sexes in samples of prehistoric bones. There are thus difficulties in the use of some demographic data as wild-domestic discriminants. Moreover, demographic characteristics are not static in time and space. They vary from population to population, and year to year. Population size and density may put pressure on available resources, encourage interspecific competition, modify the intensity and nature of diseases, encourage predation, and result in periodic catastrophies (Jarman and Wilkinson,1972).

One of the most discouraging problems in the study of the origin of domestication has been the persistence in the literature of what Reed (1959) described as "unverified" claims for early animal domestication. Pigs, whose wide geographic range and ready exploitation of diverse environments had brought them into contact with prehistoric peoples over many parts of the world, is a notable example. The question of the origin of this species has been one of the important problems in archaeozoology and the subject has been discussed for over a century. Some authors have proposed that domestic pigs may result from the simple indigenous taming of wild pigs of the same area. For example, von Nathusius (1864) distinguished two different stocks: one European, and the other Asian, especially Chinese. Blanford

(1891) was of the opinion that domestic pigs in India were derived from an indigenous race. Rutimeyer (1861) identified

4 pig remains from the Swiss Neolithic "Lake dwellings" as an Asian form or a hybrid Eurasian pig that had lived in the same area as the wild European pig and he called them Sus palustris. Later on

Pira (1909) suggested that they were rather a prehistoric domestic race that had developed slowly from the native wild

European pig. Zeuner (1963) and Bokonyi (1983) also suggested that the domestication of the wild pig took place both in Asia and in Europe. Some authors tried to bring in some other sources for certain domestic breeds (Rolleston,1877 ; Nehring,1889 ;

Swinhoe,1870 ; Hemmer,1978). However, the question of the origin of pig domestication has remained an unsolved problem.

Nevertheless, it has been generally accepted that there are three changes basic in the proportion of the skull that relate to domest icat ion:

Firstly, according to Hole, Flannery and Neely (1969), the length of the second and third molars of wild pigs are distinguishable from those of domestic pigs. The mouth of domestic pigs has undergone a process of shortening. There occurs a shortening of the length of the molar row as well as a crowding of its molars, and this process leads to reduced crown length measurements in domestic pigs (Hole, Flannery and Neely (1969).

Secondly, according to Angress (1960), it is possible to determine whether pigs were domesticated based upon the length of the snout. The adult proportions of the wild pig skull are affected mainly by the grubbing and rooting activities of that animal. If the opportunity to grub is prevented or reduced there

5 is no stimulus for the snout to develop lengthwise. A domesticated pig has no need to grub for his food since it is being provided with food, and a long snout becomes unnecessary

(Angress,1960).

The final criterion again suggested by Angress, is the presence or absence of the lower first premolar (PI) (Angress,1960).

However,the first criterion which was suggested by Hole, Flannery and Neely (1969) applies only to adult animals, and moreover crown lengths decrease as the tooth gets worn. Second and third criteria suggested by Angress (1969) are not useful either because, complete upper jaws are rare from archaeological sites, therefore it is impossible to determine what changes occurred in the total length of the snout.It can also be argued that some domestic pigs can also have long snouts if grubbing for food makes up an important part of their subsistence pattern. The presence or absence of the lower first premolar (PI) again applies only to mature animals and moreover, as we will see later

in this research, in some wild pig populations the number of

individuals without PI is quite high ( pg$. 240- 249 ).

The aim of this study is to compare pig remains from several archaeological sites with their modern counterparts in order to

shed light on the question of where and when the domestication

of this animal occurred, whether the origin of its domestication

was a single event occurring in one part of the world and spreading from there to other regions, or whether there were

6 several independent zones in which there was early pig domestication separated by areas in which there was none. In order to achieve this it is necessary to determine possible reasons for size variation in modern and archaeological pig samples and to elucidate good criteria for the recognition of pig domestication.

A series of new measurements on a variety of skeletal elements, as well as the ones which are customarily taken, are employed in this analysis. Measurements are based on as large a total sample as possible, over as wide a geographic range and archaeological time span as seems relevant to the problem. The study is divided into two parts:

1. Modern wild pig populations of known age and sex from various

parts of the world are examined in order to analyse variation

within such populations to see whether it is possible to

distinguish between environmental and genetic factors

influencing these populations. Also, to determine the

phenotypes of modern forms living in various environments as

well as the variation between populations. Modern European

domestic pigs are not examined because during the last

century fundamental changes took place in these pigs, linked

to the introduction of highly modified Chinese breeds and

thus the transformation beyond all recognition of indigenous

European breeds. Today the modern European domestic pigs are

selectively and efficiently bred for size (Groves,1981). The

only recent domestic population examined comes from Africa.

7 It is a very primitive domestic stock, and is therefore more

comparable with prehistoric domestic pigs.

Pig remains are similarly analysed from several archaeological

sites in the Near East, which have the potential to shed

light on the domestication question. Time periods are broad;

starting from the Middle/Upper Palaeolithic, but mainly

focusing on the critical Pre-pottery Neolithic (as the

domestication of this species isclosely associated with a

sedentary way of life, which is already established in the

Pre-pottery Neolithic period). This is followed by later

periods, when fully domestic animals are seen almost

everywhere in the Near East. In other words the time periods

are from ca. 80000 to 12/11000 then to 9/8000 BP and thence

up to much more recent dates.

8 CHAPTER II

1. MATERIALS

The recent and archaeological material used in this study are from the following collections and the data were collected by myself unless otherwise indicated.

1.1. Modern material

Origin/Source Institution Abbreviations

Ziguinchor,Portugal Guinea,Africa labaratoire d'archaeo'zooloqie, Saint-Andre de St.A.C. Cruzieres, France Tunisia Naturhistorisches Museum, Vienna, Austria Soain British Museum, Natural History, England Smithsonian Institution,National Museum of Natural SINMNH History,Department of Anthropology,Washington DC, USA Universitate Niinchen, Institut fur Palaeoanatomie, IJMIPDGTM Oonestikationsforschung und Geschichte der Tiermedizin, Munich, West Germany France Italy Universita degli Studi Firenze Museo Zoologico USFMZ de "Le Specola1, Florance, Italy Humboldt Universitat, Museum fur Naturkunde zu Berlin, East Germany SINMNH Netherlands Rijkuniversiteit Groningen,Biologisch-Archaeologisch RGBAI Instituut, Groningen,Netherlands Universiteit van Amsterdam, Instituut voor Prae-en UAIPP Protohistoiere, Amsterdam, Netherlands Instituut voor Veeteltkundig Onderzoek, Netherlands IVO Rijkmuseum van Naturlijke Historie, Leiden, RMN Netherlands Fast and West Germany Universitat Tubingen, Institut fur Urgeschichte, UTIU West Germany Marthin-Luther Universitat, Julius Klihn Sammlung, MLUJKS Halle-Saale, East Germany Christian Albrechts Universitat, Institut fur CAUIH Haustierkunde, Kiel, West Germany h'UMNZN UHIPDGTM

SINMNH Schleswig Holstein, West Germany CAUIH Darss, East Germany Gatarsleben tfakel, East Germany Gatarsleben Hungary BNNH Poland Field Museum of Natural History, Chicago, USA FMNH

9 Czechoslovakia - . >4*1 Austria NM Rcaania Tel Aviv University, Department of Zoology, Israel TUDZ NM Turkey S.Payne's collection, Cambridge, England SP (!) British Institute of Archaeology, Ankara, Turkey BIAA (2) B.Kusatman's collection, Istanbul, Turkey BK University Harvard, Cambridge HA, Museum of UHMCZ Comparative Zoology, Boston, USA FMNH HUMNZM CAUIH UTIU NM Israel Hebrew University, Department of Zoology, Israel HUDZ TUDZ HUMNZH NM Iraq FMNH Iran FHNH NM SINMNH India FMNH UHMCZ China FMNH SINMNH Hest Siberia NM Sumatra Zoologisch Museum, Instituut voor Taxonomische ZMITZ Zoologie, Amsterdam, Netherlands

1.2. Archaeological Material

Site Abbreviations (3) Location (see Map 4) Period Date years in (4) Collection (5) BC Erbaba/Suberde Er/Sub 1968-69 Central Anatolia, Turkey PPN 6500-5500 UHMCZ Cayonii CT 1968-*: SE Anatolia, Turkey PPN 7250-6750 Diyarbakir Museum, Turke\ Gritille Tepe GT 1981-84 SE Anatolia, Turkey PPN 7000-6000 University of Pennsylvani Anthropology Departmant, University Museum Hayaz Hoyuk HH 1979-83 SE Anatolia, Turkey PPN 6500-6000 Adiyaman Museum, Turkey Kuiar Tepe KT 1983 SE Anatolia, Turkey PN 5500-5000 Istanbul Archaeological Museum, Turkey Arnouq Aq 1931-38 SE Anatolia, Turkey Hal.-E.Dyn. 6000-3000 FMNH Ksar' Akil KA 1937/38-47/48 Near Beirut, Lebanon MP,UP,Mes. 50/40-14/12 000 RSBAI Kebara Keb Mount Carmel, Israel Mous. 50/ 40.000 HUDZ UP 36/ 32.000

(1) and 12) data is after Payne and Bull (1988). (3) For explanations of the abbreviations see page 237. (4) Dates are approximate, for details see the appropriate pages in the text (the approximate dates of cultural periods of Israel are after Davis, 1982, 1985 ; Ewing, 1947 ; Prausnitz and Hreschner, 1971, (5) Excavations dates are given within paranthesis i

10 Hatula Ha 1931-84 Near Latrun, Israel L.Nat. 9000 HUDZ Hayofiin Cave D Hay 1965-71 Western Galilee, Israel Aurign. 25000 HUDZ Piyoni® Cave B and Terrace 1974-79 Nat. 10000- 9000 Net iv Hagdud m 1977 Jordan Valley, Israel PFNA 8000- 7000 HUDZ Ein 9s v EO r-IV 1953-94 Sea of Galilee, Israel Keh 12000-10000 HUDZ Salabiyah Sal 1977-70 Wadi Fazael, Israel L.Nat./PPNA 11000- 9000 HUDZ Atlit A 1981-84 Mount Carmel, Israel PPNB 7000- 5500 HUDZ Yiftsh el Y 1933-85 Lower Galilies Israel FPNIB 7000- 5500 HUDZ 1ne^ en Jericho Jer x Jjl US Jordan Valley, Israel Nat 10000- 8000 BMNH PPNA-PPNB 8000- 5500 PN 5500- 4000 Chalc 4000- 3150 MBA 3150- 1500 Byz. Abou Gosh AG 1967-63 Near to Jerusalem, Israel PPNB 7000- 5500 St.A.C. Esisamoun BS 1972 Hula Basin, Israel PPNB,PN 7000- 4000 HUDZ, St.A.C. hunhata Hun 1950-57 Jordan Valley, Israel PPNB 7000- 5500 St.A.C. PN 5500- 4000 Sefuni m Sef 1941/55-57 Mount Carmel, Israel PPN,PN,Later HUDZ fTevs Yam Cl) m 195S Near to Mt.Carmel, Israel Late PN 4200- 4300 HUDZ Tell Can TD 1955-74 Northwest Galillee, Israel PN 5500- 4000 HUDZ Nahal Betzetz NB 1935-89 Israel PPNB 7000- 5500 HUDZ PN 5500- 4000 Byz Tell Tao TT 1985 Israel PPNB 7000- 5500 HUDZ PN 5500- 4000 C h a k 4000- 3150 EBA 3150- 2200 Ain Ghazsl Ain Gh. 1982-85 Near Amman, Jordan PPN 7250- 6200 R.Metzger's collection, USA Kureybet Hur 1954/71-75 East of Alleppo, Syria PPNB 6250- 6000 St.A.C. Tell Ramad I-II R 1954-59 Northern Levant, Syria PPN 6250- 5900 St.A.C. Tell Aswad A 1971-72 Damascus Basin, Syria PPN 7790- 6590 St.A.C. l>n Qesir m 1985 Nest to Hasseke Syria Chalc-MBA 5000 SINMNH Tepe Asiab AS 1960 Kermanshah Valley, Iran PPN 3000- 7000 FMNH Tepe Sarah SA 1950 Kermanshah Valley, Iran PN 7000- 6000 FMNH Tepe Siahbid SI 1950 Kermanshah Valley, Iran Late Hal.-Early L'b. 5000- 4000 FMNH Cehshavar C 1950 Kermanshah Valley, Iran Uruk 3500 FMNH Ganj Oar eh GO 1957-74 Gama Ah Valley, Iran PPN 8500- 7000 SINMNH Ali Kosh AK 1953 Dsh Luran Plain, Iran PPN 7000- 5300 SINMNH Tape Sabz TS 1953 Beh Luran Plain, Iran 4100- 3800 SINMNH Hajji Firuz HF 1958-61/58 Soldu: Valley, Iran PM 5500- 5000 UHMCZ Palegawra P 1947-55 Zagros Mountains, Iraq Mss 10000 FMNH Kari m Shahir KS 1347-55 Chemchemal Valley, Iraq PPN 9000- 7000 FMNH iv 1 e faat H 1950 Zagros Mountains , Iraq Hes or PPN FMNH Jerro J 1947-55 Chemcheaal Valley, Iraq PFN-FN 6750- 6250 FMNH Matarrah HA 1947-55 Near to Kirkuk, , Iraq Has.- Sam. 5000- 5500 FMNH Gird Banahilk GB 1947-55 Diana Plain, Iraq Hal. 5000 FMNH

11 Most of the modern material was in the form of skulls only.

However, postcranial skeletons were also examined when found,

although the sample sizes were small. Sample size, in general,

was a big problem in most of the archaeological collections.

Identification numbers for each specimen of both modern and

archaeological samples were given as they were originally given

on the bones. The raw data collected are given in Appends* (p^S-

240-506; S47- W and the locations of the modern and archaeological

materials collected can be seen on pag.es 80 and 165; respectively.

2. METHODS .

Two different populations had to be used for cranial and

postcranial comparisons due to the lack of any large samples of

complete skeletons in collections studied. In the case of cranial

analyses the standard values of the modern wild pig population of

348 specimens from Hakel, East Germany were used. For the

postcranial analyses standard values of the modern wild pig

population from Iran were used (15 specimens).

For age determination of the modern samples, the following

methods were used: a) teeth were listed in order of eruption; b)

epiphyses were listed in apparent fusion order. All ages are

given in months. The following abbrevations are used in age

determinations:

12 a) For cranial material;

W - tooth visible in crypt

eE - erupting through bone

1/2 - half way up between bone and occlusal plane

U - up to occlusal plane, no wear visible

jJ - wear on enamel, no dentine yet exposed

wW - dentine exposed by wear

Ab - absent

C1,C2,C3 - cuspl. cusp2, cusp3 b) For postcranial material;

U - unfused

f - fusing

F - fused; ie-there are no open areas along the fusion line.

When there are no gaps the bone is considered fused even

if the line at the zone of union is still visible,

p - proximal

d - distal

In the case of the scapula, fusion data are for the tuber scapulae, in the case of the pelvis for the acetabulum.Grouping is made according to the eruption of lower teeth. Capital letters are used for the permanent teeth, and small letters for the milk teeth.The anterior (cusp 1) and posterior (cusp 2) halves of Ml and M2 are treated separately, and dp4 and M3 are treated as having three parts (cusps 1,2,3). Criteria usedin the grouping the wild pig sample from Hakel are as follows:

13 Age Group i3 c il dp3 dp4 dp2 i2 Ml PI 13 112 II P4 P3 P2 12 M3 Cl C2 Cl C2 Cl C2 C3

V-l/2 2 U-H 3 4 5 U-W 6 U-H U 8 H H U

Measurements were taken with sliding callipers and are given to

the nearest tenth of a millimeter. They were normally taken on

the right side; measurements on the left only being used when

the right measurements are missing or questionable. Measurements

which were chosen are commonly available in archaeological

samples and are often included in publications. 48 dimensions on

cranial specimens and 43 dimensions on postcranial specimens

were measured. Most of the measurements are defined by Von den

Driesch (1976) but some were defined by Payne and Bull (1988),

and some were suggested by Richard Meadow and John Watson. Others

have been introduced here by myself. Some of the material studied

here has already been published. The published measurements may

be slightly different to the ones I have taken; the differences

being what one might expect from two observors using different

callipers and slightly different measuring techniques. The

following measurements were taken; numbers above the letters

indicating superior teeth, those below the letters inferior teeth

(for illustration details of measurements see Fig. 1 on pa^e 19.

14 a. Cranial measurements:

5 **** - length of premaxilla (prosthion - premolare) 3 (25) C-M - length from the aboral border of the alveolus of

C and the aboral border of the alveolus of C-*f*

i^“<3p2 - length from the oral border of the alveolus of

the dp to the aboral border of the alveolus of 1

Pj-dp^ - length of the oral border of the alveolus of PI -

aboral border of the alveolus of dp^

(1 1 ) I3/I3 “ len9th between the oral border of the alveolus of

the alveolus of I3 (in the case of unerupted I3 ,

i^) and the aboral border of the alveolus of P^

(9) P3 ~ length of the premolar row, measured along the

alveoli on the buccal side

(6 ) - length from the aboral border of the alveolus of

M 3 to the aboral border of the canine alveolus

(4) - length of the horizontal ramus: infradentale -

aboral border of the alveolus of M3

(1 2 ) - length of the median section of the body of the

mandible: Infradentale - the mental prominence

(16) - height of the mandible in front of M|

A**** - width of the mandible in front of Mj

(14) - the middle height of the vertical ramus: gonion

ventrale - highest point of the condyle proce’ss

(3) - length from the aboral border of the alveolus of

M3 to the gonion caudale

B** - Breadth of the condyle process

The nuibers in parentheses are the nuabers given to those aeasureaents byVbrti den Oriesch (1976) Measurements larked by * are defined by Payne and Bull (19B8) Heasureaents aarked by ** were suggested by Richard Headov (personal coaaunication, 1986) Heasureaents aarked by m are defined by John Watson (personal coaaunication, 1986) Heasureaents aarked by m i are introduced by ayself

15 C** - Angle between the gonion caudale and gonion

ventrale

P*-dp** - length between the oral border of the alveolus of

PI and aboral border of the alveolus of dp

(29) pl -P^ - length of the premolar row measured along the

alveoli on the buccal side

(27a) P -M - length of the cheektooth row, measured along the

alveoli on the buccal side

(28) M.V-M 3 - length of the molar row, measured along the

alveoli on the buccal side

dp2“dp^ - length of the milk molar row, measured along the

alveoli on the buccal side

(9a) P " length between the oral border of the alveolus of

P and aboral border of the alveolus P

(8 ) M|-M^ - length of the molar row,measured along the

alveoli on the buccal side.

Tooth lengths - Lengths of the following teeth were measured

on the occlusal surface: dp^l****, dp^l*,M^L*,

M2L*, M^L*, dp^l*, P^L****, M}L*, M^L*, M 3L*.

Tooth widths - Width measurements were taken on the enamel crown

junction and the following measurements were

taken: dp^wp****, dp^wa*, dp^wp*, m^WA*, M 1WP*,

M2WA*, M^WP*, M^WA*, dp^wa****, dp^wp*, P^W****,

M «WA*, MjWP*, M2WA*, M2WP*, M3WA*.

b. Postcranial measurements

Scapula Glp - Greatest length of the processus articularis

(glenoid process)

16 SLC - Smallest length of the collum scapulae (width

of the neck)

BG - Greatest breadth of the glenoid cavity

SBC**** - Smallest breadth of the collum scapulae

Humerus Bd - Greatest breadth of distal end

BT - Greatest breadth of trochlea

HCT* - Diameter of trochlear construction, taken at

its narrowest points

Radius BpP* - Proximal width taken along the axis of the

rotation of the joints, at right angles to

the articular groove.

Dp - Proximal depth

Bd - Greatest breadth of the distal end

Bfd**** - Greatest breadth of the facies articularis

distal is

Ulna DPA - depth across the processus anconaeus

SDO - Smallest depth of the olecranon

LO - Length of the olecranon

LPA**** - Length of the proximal articular surface

BPC - Greatest breadth across the coronoid process^

greatest breadth of the proximal articular

surface.

MC III Bp - Greatest breadth of the proximal end of MCIII

MC III GL - Greatest length of MCIII

MC IV Bp - Greatest breadth of the proximal end of MC IV

MC IV GL - Greatest length of MCIV

17 Pelvis LAR* - Length of the acetabulum

DA*** - Depth of the acetabulum

Femur DCP - Diameter of caput

Bp - Greatest breadth of the proximal end

Bd - Greatest breadth of the distal end

BT**** - Greatest breadth of the trochlea

Tibia Bp - Greatest breadth of the proximalend

BdP* - Distal width taken along the axis of rotation

of joints - i.e. right angles to the

articular grooves

Bfd - Greatest breadth of the facies articularis

distal is

Dd - Greatest depth of the distal end

SBD**** - Smallest breadth of distal end (smallest

breadth of the neck)

Astragalus Gil - Greatest length of the lateral half

Glm - Greatest length of the medial half

Bd - Greatest breadth of the distal end

LA*** - Smallest length of the astragalus taken along

the proximal-distal grooves

Calcaneum GL - Greatest length of the calcaneus

GD - Greatest depth of the calcaneus

1**** _ Length from the end point of the distal end

to the processus

2**** - Length of the processus

MT III Bp - Greatest breadth of the proximal metatarsus III

GL - Greatest length of the proximal metatarsus III

18 Mandible

H I . 2

[Goc WA/V/P WA Wp A

Gov Huierus Scapula h t c

6LP

86

Radius Ulna

k-M* Dp

Pelvis Feaur Tibia

— p-

DCP 1 1,1 EkJP 1 v 1 n S b o Calcaneui Astragalus Metacarpal Metatarsal IV III IV GL III

GLt Im GL GL Bp Bp Bp 'm £SL. Figure 1: Diagraas illustrating the definitions of aeasureaents used in this paper

19 MT IV Bd Greatest breadth of the proximal metatarsus

GL Greatest length of the proximal metatarsus

The log ratio technique was used to look at different measurements in relation to each other.This technique, which was introduced to zoology by Simpson (1941),expresses the difference between any measurement and a standard measurement. According to this technique, firstly, one specimen or group of specimens is chosen as standard. Then, each of the other values is divided by the chosen standard value and then the result is converted into logarithims (Logarithmic ratio = Log (value/standard value).

Eg: Measurement Value Standard value Ratio Log ratio

Pl-dp4 47.5 45.3 1.049 + 0.020

M2WA 16.6 18.4 0.902 - 0.045

Dimensions larger than the standard are thus represented by positive values while those smaller than the standard have negative values. Zero line represents the standard value. The horizontal distance between any two points in diagram is proportional to the ratio between the measurements of the two animals (Simpson, Roe and Lewontin, 1960). Points falling in a vertical line, even if larger or smaller than the standard value have the same proportional relationship to the standard value.

Using this technique it is possible to compare different measurements in the same animal or in different animals independent of scale. For example, even though the length of a

20 tooth row will always be greater than the length of a single

tooth in that row, the two measurements can be compared relative

to the standard value. If a measurement is relatively larger than

one plotted above or below, it will fall to the right, smaller to | the left. This technique has been used for comparing measurements

in Appendiiv (pgs. 3>07-3 / * $ , , using the standard values given

in pg. 53 and 57.

For each measurement the standard is the best available estimate

of "full size". In the case of upper and lower jaw and tooth row

measurements, the standard values are based on the means of the

Hakel groups 6 and 7 female and male means, in the case of adult

animals. Hakel groups 1 and 2 female and male means are used in

the case of juveniles. For the postcranial measurements the

standard values are based on the mean measurements of older age

classes, i.e. Iranian female and male means of fused elements,

and for the elements which do not have epiphysial fusion, such as

the astragalus and proximal metapodials, means of group 7 and 8

female and male means. For tooth measurements, the standard

values are based on the most recently erupted teeth; thus

permanent teeth standards are based on the means of female and

male means from any group in which teeth are between the U and J

stage. Worn teeth are not included. However, milk teeth standards

are based on the means of female and male means of the Group 1

and 2 animals. In this case worn teeth are included in order to

have a reasonably large sample to deal with statistically. Group 3 animals are not included as the teeth are highly worn and are

about to be replaced by permanent teeth at this stage.

21 For the purpose of comparing the shape of different groups of animals together, the "size and shape" statistic of Penrose

(1954) was used. According to this method the shape distance can easily be calculated. The first step is to convert the means to standard deviation units. For the purpose of all distance estimations, chosen standard deviations for each measurement are agreed upon and the measurements are expressed in terms of

"standard devitions units". This unit is calculated by dividing

the means by standard deviations derived from large samples.

e.g. : Mean Values Measurement Chosen Standard Deviation Group 1 Group 2 1 6.46 184.5 188.6 . 2 5.90 149 . 9 140.8 . Standard Deviation Units = 184.5/6.46 = 28.56 140.8/5.90 = 23.86

After this has been done the differences dl, d2, d3...dn between the mean values in any two populations can be tabulated. The next step in calculating the "shape" distance is to calculate the

"size" distance using the following formulai

Size distance = £(dl + d2 + d3....dn / n ^ = ^S(d)J ^ n (i d- the differences between the mean in any two populations n= number of the measurements

2 2 2 2 If we subtract this from dl + d2 + d3 dn / n what remains is an estimate of the shape distance between the two populations.

Shape distance = S (d2)^/n - £s"dj 2 / n (li)

22 For example:

6roup5 of aniials ABC Measurements converted to standard deviation units 1 28.56 29.20 30.68 2 25.41 23.86 26.10 3 21.77 21.20 22.10 4 26.52 27.01 28.68 5 24.01 23.72 25.01 6 26.66 27.09 28.06 7 15.53 16.27 16.27

Difference A-B A-C B-C

dl - 0.64 - 2.12 - 1.48 d2 + 1.55 ♦ 0.31 - 1.24 d3 + 0.57 - 0.33 - 0.90 d4 - 0.49 - 2.16 - 1.67 d5 + 0.29 - 1.00 - 1.29 dS - 0.43 - 1.40 - 1.97 67 - 0.74 - 0.74 0.00

7 Sui of d values S(d) - 0.11 - 7.44 - 7.55 1

Sui of squares of d-values S \d J 4.18 12.87 9.93 1

7 * Size distance S(d) 49 0.00 1.13 1.16 . 1 _

7 ' Shape distance = S Vd y / 7 S(d 49 0.80 0.11 O.Z5 L 1 J

Inspection of these results leads at once to the conclusion that

the groups A and B are of the same "size" but that both differ

from C; they are both smaller than group C. In respect of "shape”,

however, the distance between the groups B and C is much less

than that between A and C or between A and B. On this basis, it

is reasonable to suggest closer affinities of group C with group

B than to the A.

In the present study, >aramelric ’les't \s useci f e s t of significance.

23 CHAPTER III f

• »

1. EVOLUTIONARY HISTORY OF SUIDAE AND THE PHYLOGENY OF SUS. THE

| WILD PIG I i | The wild pig belongs to the mammalian order of Artiodactyla, the

even toed ungulates,to the suborder of Sulformes.to the family

Suidae. and to the subfamily Suinae. Sus is one of the five :

genera beL0.ng.m3 . to this subfamily, namely the babirusa

(Babyrousa)(1). the warthog (Phacochoerus)(2)f the giant forest

hog (Hvlochoreus)(3). the bush pig and red river hog

fPotamochoerus) ( 4 ) .

Thenius (1970) traces the Suidae back to the Oligocene, with the

earliest genus being Palaeochoerus. Then comes Babvrousa as a

separate lineage since that time. The Potamochoerini and Suini

diverge in the Middle Miocene. Sus appears in the Lower Pliocene

of Europe and Indonesia. According to White and Harris (1977)

Potamochoerus appears in the Mid-Pliocene. Then comes Hvlochoerus

in the Upper Pliocene, as the direct descendant of

Propotamochoerus which is known from the latest Miocene in East

Africa (Thenius 1970). From quite a different stock, whose

earlier representatives are as yet unknown, comes Metridiochoerus

(synonym: Stvlochoerus). known first in the Upper Pliocene and

plausibly tne ancestor ot Pnacocnoerus m wmte's and Harris'

view (White and Harris 1977).

(1) The babirusa (babi=pig, rusa=deer) is a nane given in Indonesia to a kind of suid whose relationship to other aeabers of the faaily is distant, even questionable (6roves, 1981). (2) The warthog is a coaaon suid of the African bush and grasslands (Groves, 1981). (3) This is the aost recently discovered suid. It was found at the beginning of this century in Kenya but, in fact, was distributed throughout the central forest block of Africa (Groves,1981). (4) One of the species (the bush pig) of this African genus lives in the bush and light forest of East and South Africa, : the other species (the red-river hog) in the rainforests of Zaire and West Africa (Groves,1981).

24 The basis of the classification used today for the genus Sus was

laid by Nehring (1888) on the basis of the cross-section of the male's lower canine. In one section of the genus came the

European wild pig Sus scrofa. and whatever further species a

particular author cared to recognise such as S.cristatus of

India, S .vittatus of a group in Indonesia, S .leucomvstax of

Japan, S .paouensis of New Guinea etc. In the other section were

south-east Asian species; the warty pig (S.verrucosus). the

bearded pig (S.barbatus). the Celebes pig (S.celebensis). the

Philippine pig (S.phi 1ippensis) and the pygmy hog (S.salvanius)

of the Sub-Himalayan region (*).

Some of these were united with others but the two groups were

classed as distinct species (Groves,1981).The general opinion of

modern zoologists and archaeozoologists is that S .scrofa is the

ancestor of the domestic pig in Europe, SW Asia and north Africa,

and that the domestic pig of China is likely to have arisen from

one of the subspecies in South-eastern Asia.

2. SUBSPECIFIC CLASSIFICATION OF SUS SCROFA (after Groves, 1981)

Sus scrofa scrofa Linnaeus,1758

Distribution: N.Spain, N.Italy, France, Germany, Denmark, Poland,

Czechoslovakia, Albania, Netherlands.

Synonymy : S. setosus Boddaert,1785

S. scrofa ferus Gmelin,1788

S. eurooaeus Pallas,1811

(*) For the definitions of the soecies see Groves,1981,74-77.

25 S.scrofa var. celtlca Strobel,1882 4

S.scrofa maiori de Beaux and Festa,1927

The size of ihe individuals o-f southern populations are clearly smaller than the others, but the increase to the north appears to be

smoothly clinal. There is no other difference, so pending further data from intermediate areas which may show a step in the cline,

the names given to the N.Spanish and N.Italian forms are included

in the synonymy of this race. To the east, there is a steep,

rapid increase in size, implying a rather narrow intergrade zone with attila.

Sus scrofa meridionalis Forsyth Major,1882

Distribution: Sardinia, Corsica, Andalusia

Synonymy : S.scrofa var sardous trobel,1882

S.scrofa baticus Thomas,1912

Size : Significantly smaller than S.scrofa scrofa

Linneaus, 1758.

According to Groves, the lack of any difference between specimens

from these islands and Andalusia could be explained either as

they representing independent adaptation to similar habitats (and

are at either end of a former landbridge) or as relicts of a form

more widespread over southwestern Europe ( but since forced into

isolated pockets by climatic deterioration).

Sus scrofa alaira Loche 1867

Distribution: Tunisia,Algeria,Morocco, coastward of the mountains

or in the low montane areas.

26 Synonymy : S.scrofa barbarus Sclater,1860

S.scrofa var. aloira Loche,1867

S. scrofa sahariensis Heim de Balsac,l937

Size : Like S.scrofa scrofa Linnaeus,1758, but has smaller

teeth.

Sus scrofa attila Thomas,1912

Distribution: Romania, Hungary, Ukraine, east into Soviet Central

Asia as for as the Aral Sea; south to the northern

flank of the Caucasus and to the Mesopotamian

delta, Iraq.

Synonymy : S.falz-feini Matschie,1918

Size : Very large compared with S.scrofa scrofa

Linnaeus,1758.

Sus scrofa lvbicus Gray,1868

Distributon: Yugoslavia, Transcaucasia, Turkey, Levant,

Palestine, Nile Delta,

Synonymy : S.mediterraneus Ulmansky,1911

S.attila reiseri Bolkay,1925

Size : As S.scrofa scrofa Linnaeus,1758 but with broader

skull and relatively shorter nasals.

Sus scrofa nioripes Blanford,1875

Distribution: Both flanks of the Tienshan Range

Size : Slightly larger than S.scrofa scrofa Linnaeus,1758,but

smaller than S.scrofa attila Thomas,1912 with broad skul

27 Sus scrofa sibiricus Sta££e/1922

Distribution: Mongolia, Transbaikalia

Synonymy : 3 .leucomvstax sibiricus Staffe,1922

S.scrofa raddeanus Adlerbeerg,1930

Size : Like a firly small S.scrofa scrofa Linnaeus,1758.

Skull is very high (Groves,1981).

Sus scrofa ussuricus Heude,1888

Distribution: Soviet Far East, Manchurian provinces, Korea

Synonymy : S.canesens Heude,1888

S.leucomvstax var. continentalis Nehring,1889

S.qiaas Heude,1892

S .sonoaricus Heude,1897

S.coranus Heude,1897

S.mandchuricus Heude,1897

Size : The largest subspecies with a low skull. Korean

ones are integrades between this subspecies and

S.scrofa leucomvstax Temminck,1842, but much closer

to ussuricus.

Sus scrofa leucomvstax Temminck,184 2

Distribution: Main islands of Japan (Honshu, Shikoku, Kyushu).

Synonymy : S.vittatus iaponica Nehring,1885

S.nipponicus Heude,1899

Size : Skull is very like small s.scrofa scrofa. Linnaeus,

1758) but broader, with short nasals and shorter

limbs than S.scrofa ussuricus Heude,1888.

28 Sus scrofa riukiuanus Kuroda,1924

Distribution: Some of the Ryuku Islands Kuroda,1924

Synonymy : S .leucomvstax riukiuanus Kuroda,1924

Size : Much smaller than S.scrofa leucomvstax

Temminck, 1842.

Sus scrofa taivanus Swinhoe,1863

Distribution: Taiwan (Formosa)

Synonymy : Porcula taivana Swinhoe,1863

Size : Similar to S.scrofa leucomvstax Temminck,1842.

Sus scrofa moupiensis Milne-Edwards,1871

Distribution: Coastal China, South Vietnam and West to Szchwan

Synonymy : S .chirodantus Heude,1888

S .oxvodontus Heude,1888

S.dicrurus Heude,1888

S .taininensis Heude,1888

S .leucorhinus Heude,1888

S .palustris Heude,1888

S.collinus Heude,1892

S.paludosus Heude,1892

S.acrocranius Heude,1892

S.curtidens Heude,1892

S .laticeps Heude,1892

S .scrofoides Heude,1892

S.microdontus Heude,1892

S .planiceps Heude,1892

29 S.melas Heude,1892

S.frontosus Heude,1892

S.soatharius Heude/1892

S .flavscens Heude,1899

Size : Like a small S.scrofa scrofa Linnaeus,1758 with

broad and high skull.

Sus scrofa cristatus Wagner,1839

Distribution: Sub Himalayan tract from Ludhiana, Punjab, via

Nepal and Sikkim to Nagaland and N Burma, Uttar

Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, probably Kolhapur, Bihar,

Bengal, south via Burma and western Thailand to

Isthmus of Kra.

Synonymy : S.aper varsaiponus and isonotus Hodgson,1842

S .indicus Gray,1843

S.benoalensis Blyth,1860

S.cristatus tvoicus Lydekker,1900

S.scrofa jubatus Miller,1906

Size : Skull differs little from S.scrofa mouoensis Milne-

Edwards,1871 ; broad, high with relatively short

nasals and small teeth.There is a cline of size

reduction to the southeast.

Sus scrofa affinis Gray,1847

Distribution: Southern India and most of Sri Lanka

Synonymy : S .zeglonensis Blyth,1851

Size : Differs from S.scrofa cristatus Wagner,1839 only in

30 its larger size. The exact boundary between this

subspecies and S.scrofa cristatus Wagner,1839 is

unclear.

Sus scrofa subsp.

Under this heading is placed a skull from Bopata, in the wet zone of Sri Lanka, far smaller than any other skull from this island.

Sus scrofa vlttatus Boie,1828

Distribution: Malaya, the offshore islands of Terutau and

Langkawi, Sumatra, Riau archipelago, Java and

offshore island of Peucang, Bali, Lombok, Sumbawa,

Komodo.

Synonymy : S.milleri Jentink,1905

S.jabatulus Miller,1906

S.peninsularis Miller,1906

S .rhionis Miller,1906

S.andersoni.Thomas and Wroughton

Size : Very like S.scrofa cristatus Wagner, 1839, but

differs in shorter nasals. According to Groves

there is an enormous range of variation in size

among geographical samples of this subspecies.

This might be because pigs cross narrow

channels in the archipelago, as they are good

swimmers and since body proportions, within

limits, are changed by diet, small restricted

habitats might cause small size without any change

in gene-pool. 3. GEOGRAPHICAL VARIATION AND DISTRIBUTION OF SUS SCROFA

Species are defined by reproductive isolation. If two consistently different forms of a genus exist in the same area,

then, if the differences between them are too great to be put down to polymorphism within one gene-pool, they are distinct species. By the turn of the century all the more distinctive

forms, now assigned to Sus scrofa. had been described as full species: vittatus from Indonesia, leucomvstax from Japan, moupensis from China, cristatus from India, meridionalis from

Sardinia as well as many others not so widely rated as distinct.

By the early years of this century, they were, gradually, being combined into fewer and fewer, more and more inclusive species.

For example, Lydekker (1915) recognised only S .scrofa (to include meridionalis). S .cristatus and S.vittatus (to include

leucomvstax). Nehring (1888) suggested that meridionalis was merely a dwarfed insular form of the European S .scrofa. Beaux and

Festa (1927) suggested that meridionalis might be a feral pig

thus explaining its supposed vittatus-1ike characters on the assumption that domestic pigs are descendants from S.vittatus.

However, later Belie (1938) compared skulls of meridionalis from

Sardinia with S.scrofa from Germany, and other places and with

vittatus. and showed that the Sardinian pigs were dwarfed insular

scrofa not having any clear affinities vittatus in their skull

characters. Kelm (1939) noted that discrete populations could be

recognised across Eurasia, classifiable as subspecies, and that

they formed a stepped cline from western Europe to Japan. Also he

32 noted that there was a gradation between scrofa and vittatus and

all these forms could be placed in a single species Sus scrofa.

Integration of range shifts and the changing of climatic

boundaries provide possible explanations for variation over this

vast area that they occupy.

Formerly the entire steppe and broad-leaved woodland zones of the

Palaearctic and Oriental Regions including Britain, Ireland and

Japan were their habitats. They are now extinct in the British

Isles and Scandinavia and considerably reduced in parts of the

continent due to hunting and perhaps climatic fluctuations.

However, with the control of hunting, the wild pig has reoccupied

the whole of its former range with the exception of areas

inaccesible because of water barriers, such as the British Isles

and southern Sweden. Isolates are still present on Honshu,

Sardinia, Corsica and NW Africa (Corbet,1978), and they have

feral stock in Indonesia, Australia and the Americas (Groves,

1981), (Map 1 on pg. 39)-

4. DIAGNOSIS, ECOLOGY AND BEHAVIOUR OF SUS SCROFA

Sus scrofa is, basically, a large animal with a short neck, short

and relatively slender limbs. The skull is elongated, narrow and

high. The muzzle is greatly elongated, its truncated end

surmounted by a special flattened, naked pad which is muscular

and moist, supported by a pair of special bones attached to the

nasals and premaxillaries. The eyes are small, set far back, and

33 the ears pointed. The feet have four well developed toes, of which only the median pair (digits III, IV) are applied to the ground when standing. Weapons are in the form of large canine tusks. These are most developed in the males, those in the upper jaw curving upwards and outwards round the side of the muzzle.

The canines of the upper and lower jaws work against each other and they are small in females. Upper incisors are present. The cheek-teeth have . Low cusps. The dental formula is complete, i.e-

13/3 Cl/1 PM4/4 H3/3 = 44

Adult S.scrofa show considerable individual variability in coat colour throughout the range of the species. Predominant general coloration is brown, with a tendency to become blackish, greyish or reddish in different individuals. The juvenile pelage is quite different from the adult; the soft, short hair with an attractive pattern of longitudinal dark stripes extending from the nape of the neck and shoulders to the root of the tail and haunches

(Harrison, 1968) .

S.scrofa in northern Eurasia inhabits a wide variety of

environments but is most plentiful in the reed-beds of Central

Asia and in oak forests (Corbet,1978). It is considered a forest

animal but it is able to inhabit a habitat in an almost dry

ecological system, which fulfills its requirements for water and

concealment and which is within its temperature limits.

Not all authors agree as to what the exact ecological conditions

or limitations are for S .scrofa. According to Bokonyi (1974), it

34 is an inhabitant of wet environments, preferring dense forest,

but also living in the bush or among the reeds along waterflows.

! It is widespread in the whole Near East in marshy areas and near

I lakes and streams. Tiesdell (1982) accepts that the broad-leafed

woodland is the original habitat of the wild pig, although in

general dense vegetation near reliable water sources is the

favoured habitat of feral pigs. According to Isaac (1970) pigs

can inhabit forest, steppe, semidesert, and even deserts near

springs, rivers and marshes as long as its requirements for water

and concealment are fullfilled. Fradrich (1974) says that wild j pigs are found in all types of forests, swamps and even densely I | populated cultivated land. i

Apart from food supply, the major limiting factor for S .scrofa

1 both latitudinally and altitudinally is the snowline where it t f can no longer walk. Snow more than about 40-50 cm. deep is

exhausting to travel through and makes food searching very

difficult. At less than this depth, the pigs can manage, even the

young which walk in single file in the tracks of the adult female

pig. They are more or less sedentary, but if ecological

conditions necessiate migration, they will migrate, especially in

the event of snowfall or flooding (Fradrich, 1974; Howe and

Bratton, 1976; Groves, 1981).

Ground-freezing, a hard crust on snow and reed-bed fires are other

limiting factors, while in general water supply is critical, as

the pig needs greater water intake than any other domestic

animal. Temperature is not a great limiting factor. The thick

35 winter coat of northern races enables them, by their huddling

and nest-building behaviour to survive well, while the animals

remain healthy up to 50 C for short periods.

Sus scrofa is basically herbivorous, its tough cartilaginous disk

on the end of its nose enables it to root, or to stir and dig up

soil. It seeks out acorns and beech mast which are its favourite

food. As these become less available in winter, the pigs then

root for more grasses, roots and starchy tubers. This diet is

more or less continued into the spring, and in summer is replaced

by berries and seeds as the annual grasses dry out and die

(Mack in,1970; Pine and Gerdes, 1973; Howe and Batton, 1976). In

steppe and desert areas the main foods are the rhizomes of

bulrush and reeds, roots of fennel, nitrebush and berries, in

winter bulrush shoots are commonly eaten. In the Volga delta,

water chestnuts are a staple. In oak forests acorns are a major

dietary item. However, it relies more on animal food in some

places and in some seasons. Small rodents are eaten, the

carcasses of large animals are scavenged and birds’ nests are

raided if built low enough to the ground. The diet varies

seasonally. Sometimes, after prolonged droughts or heavy

flooding, food becomes very short and mortality rises sharply. In

the southern regions of Central Asia the diet is much more

varied, and therefore more reliable than in the northern steppes

(Groves,19 81).

They are variable animals both genetically and behaviourally.

Studies have shown no evidence of diminution of the overall gene

pool after 13 generations (ca 25 years) of breeding under

36 :ondili tions of selection for a single trait in an experimental pig populiLation (Fredeen, 1972). They form a complex social hiararchy. rhe Ibasic social group would seem to consist of an adult female and her offspring, males up to 1.5 years and females up to 2.5 yearsrs of age. Adult and maturing males live alone. The fall is ruttti ng season which lasts until early winter. During the rut, w h e n i the males and females come together, the hierarchy is estahb 1 ished. The more dominant males mate with as many as 5 to 8 femailes. When determining dominance the males fight fiercely with eachi other. P,C3S mate until the end of November or December.

Theiir litters are born in March, April after a gestation periicd of 4 months. In years when food is scarce the mating seasson may be delayed until spring so that litters are born as

late* as June onwards. In general, pigs have larger litters in warmner climates. A litter consists of 3 to 10 piglets. Under

nominal circumstances the litters are born once a year. The posssibility of the pig being served throughout the year (as

striip»ed piglets have been seen throughout the year in western

EuroDp>e), and the possibility of having more than one farrowing in

a yeeair, are natural characteristics of the species of Sus scrofa

(Lauiwrerier, 1983) . Normally piglets are weaned in the spring.

Groiups of females drive the males away and continue to remain in

a cgroup themselves. Groups of from 2 to 5 females with their

offspring nest near each other. As a group, these females defend

their nesting area (Fradrich,1974). Thesiger (1954, 1964) has

giv

the marshes of southern Iraq: Pigs living in the marshes devastate the rice fields at night. During the day, they sleep in their nests composed of great heaps of rushes which must have been bitten off and carried in their mouths for many yards. The nests are usually sited on the banks of the ditches and such nests may be six feet across and two feet or more in height. At times of flood they move out of the marshes and reside in dense woods of untended palms and thorn scrub in the date gardens. They do great damage to cereals, preferring wheat to barley, usually feeding at night. They sometimes come back into the villages and spend the night in empty houses.Ii has been recorded that they occasionaly attack boats or even cars, and sometimes people

(Hatt, 1959 ; Thesiger 1964).

Excluding human groups,the main enemies of the wild pig seem to

be, wherever they occur, the wolf and tiger. The competitors are muskrat, hare, badger, fox, squirrel, deer, bears, greylag goose,

raven, rook, pheasant, nuthatch and others (Groves,1981).

38 a 1 Gorpi dsrbto o Ss coa useis atr rvs IS91) Groves, (after subspecies scrofa Sus of distribution GeoQraphic : 1 Map

ts>

00

M

U1 ^ \it'A : = i ^ u " T y ■ t

ot Ul * U M M O U M M cncncncncncncncncncncncncncncnus

77 w m in a w c e a

39 CHAPTER IV

VARIATION IN SKELETAL ELEMENTS WITHIN A WILD PIG POPULATION (Appendix: Pages p-307 ~

Size has long been used by archaeozoologists as a criterion for distinguishing wild from domestic pig remains. In this chapter the use of size for this purpose is discussed in the light of analyses of variation in some commonly employed and some recently

introduced skeletal measurements in Sus. both in relation to sex and age, to elucidate the most useful measurements to take in archaeological samples.

1. Material

1.1. Cranial Elements

With the kind permission of the Ministry of Agriculture and

Forestry of the German Democratic Republic (as it then was), and with the invaluable help of Prof. Dr. Manfred Stubbe, Dr. Lotte

Stubbe and Dr. Manfred Teichert, I had a chance to study 348 wild

pig skulls from the Hakel Game Research Area. The collection had

been first started by Prof.Hans Stubbe, the leader of the

Wildlife Research Society of the German Democratic Republic and

had been collected over an extended span of time from 1957 to

1985. Material is housed in Gatarsleben.

Hakel is one of the largest isolated forests and wild game

research areas in East Germany. It is located in Aschersleben, in

the north Hartz Mountains, between the provinces of Magdeburg and

Halle (M.Stubbe, 1971; I.Stubbe, M.Stubbe, W.Stubbe, 1980,;

40 M.Stubbe, I.Stubbe, W.Stubbe, 1986 ),(see p0-8 0 ) . There are other smaller game research areas which cover about 1300-1500 hectares in Hagdeburger Bonde, such as Huy, Fallstein and Hohes Holz and evidence shows that sometimes animals go from one area to another. Summers are quite cool and winters are very cold in the area. Snowfall is heavy and snow-cover may persist for months.

Wild pigs living in the area are fed with maize, potatoes and sugar beet, additional to what they can find in the forest

(Personal communication with Prof.M.Stubbe,January 1987).

1.2. Postcranial Elements

It was not possible to use the Hakel material to analyse the variation in postcranial elements as the material consisted only of skulls. Therefore modern postcranial skeletons from 15 wild pigs from Iran are used to analyse the variation in postcranial elements. The material was collected by Charles A.Reed and by

Henry Field during the Iranian Prehistoric Project carried out by the Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago and the

Institute of Archaeology of the University of Teheran in 1959-

1960 (Reed,1961); also during the Street Expedition of 1962-1963.

(Lay,1967). Specimens came from Mazenderan, Khuzistan, Goyan,

Azerbaijan and Kerman Baluchistan (personal communications with

C.A.Reed, May 1987).

Lay notes that wild pig shows a wide habitat tolerance in Iran which ranges from forest to semi-desert. They occur in abundance in the Caspian forests where they feed both in the forests and in the cultivated fields. The damage that they do to the fields

41 brings great wrath upon them, usually ineffectual, from the local farmers. Lay says that, during the expedition, they noted large populations in Seistan, where the animals retired to the reed beds of the dry Hamum-i Hirmand lake bed during the day, and along the Kharkeh river south of Shush where they inhabited riverine thickets. They also observed wild pigs on dry open plains near Kazerum and near the Iraq border west of Shush

(Lay, 1967).

2. Analyses

2.1.Ageing the wild pig population from Hakel according to tooth eruption and wear

The same sequence is given by a number of authors for the eruption of permanent teeth in pigs: Ml and PI erupt at about the same time, followed by 13 and C more or less together, then by

M2, then by II, P2, P3, and P4 within a short time of one another, then by 12 and finally M3 (Br iedermann, 1965;

Matschke,1967 ; Bull and Payne, 1982).

Data for wild pig from Hakel give more or less the same sequence with one exception which is that P4 erupts before P3 and P2 and is followed by P3 and then by P2. However, as they all erupt within a very short time of one another, the general eruption sequence described above is accepted for the Hakel material as well. Data from Hakel pigs also indicate that some of the upper teeth erupt sometime later than their lower equivalents.

Details of dental development are given 'in Appendix( p g S*

2 4 On this basis the Hakel animals are divided into 8 age groups:

42 Group 1: Ml has not yet fully erupted(Ml at the stage of V-l/2)

Group 2: At least the first half of Ml has fully erupted (M1C1 at

the stage of U-W)

Group 3: At least the first half of M2 has fully erupted (M2C1 at

the stage of U-W).

Group 4: Milk teeth have been replaced by permanent teeth and P4

has fully erupted (P4 at the stage of U-W).

Group 5: 12 fully erupted (12 at the stage of wear).

Group 6: First cusp of M3 has fully erupted (M3C1 is at the stage

o f U - W ) .

Group 7: Last cusp of M3 fully erupted but not worn yet (M3C3 is

at the stage of U-J).

Group 8: All three cusps of M3 are heavily worn(M3 is at the

stage of WWW).

As a result, the 348 specimens are broken down by age and sex as

f o l l o w s :

Group Female Male Total

1 3 3 6 2 3 2 5 3 8 5 3 1 0 2 8 3 8 4 2 7 3 6 6 3 5 3 0 3 6 6 6 6 1 5 1 7 3 2 7 4 0 1 4 5 4 8 2 2 4

T o t a l : 1 5 9 1 8 9 3 4 8

The timing of tooth eruption in modern wild pigs varies according

to different sources:

43 Brredermann working on wild pigs in Germany gives figures for the eruption of Ml as 4- months; of 13 and C as 10-12 months; of M2 as 12 months; of I1,P2,P3,P4 as 14-16 months; of 12 as 18-20 months and for M3 21-24 months (Br \ edermann,1965).

Matschake reporting on penned European wild pigs gives slightly larger figures: for Ml 5-6 months; for PI 5-8 months; for 13 7-9 months; for C 7-11 months; for M2 12-14 months; for II 13-14 months; for P3 14-16 months; for P2 15-17 months; for P4 14-18 months; for 12 18-22 months and finally for M3 23-26 months

(Matschke , 1967).

Bull and Payne's research on Turkish wild pigs indicates that 13 and C erupt at around 7-11 months; 12 at around 19-23 months and

M3 is in later stages of eruption and in wear at around 31-35 months old (Bull and Payne,1982).

Although the information given by a number of authors about the timing of the eruption of permanent teeth in wild pigs varies, the overall range of variation is not very large. On the basis of the above information, the estimated ages of the Hakel groups are given in Table 1.

Age 6roup Estiiated Age according to according to according to for Hakel for Hakel saeple Br»edereann,1965 Hatschke,1967 Bull and Payne,1982 saeple (in eonths) (in eonths) (in eonths) (in eonths)

1 3 - 4 2 4 - 11 4 - 5 5 - 6 7 - 11 3 12 - 14 12 12 - 14 4 14 - 18 14 - 16 14 - 18 5 18 - 23 18 - 20 18 - 22 19 - 23 6 21 - 26 21 - 24 23 - 26 7 27 - 35 31 - 35 8 older older

Table 1: Estieated ages of wild pigs froe Hakel

44 Once the animals are aged on this basis, it can be suggested that in Hakel the wild pig Ml erupts at around 4-11 months, probably starting to erupt towards the begining of this range and is already in wear by the end. P4 erupts at around 14-18 months, 12 at around 18-23 months, M3 at around 21-23 months (probably starting to erupt towards the beginning of this range and coming to the later stages of its eruption towards the end), and all three parts of M3 are in wear at 31-35 months old. It is difficult to estimate the age when all three cusps of M3 are heavily worn. All we can say here about that stage is that they are older than 35 months.

2.2. Sequence and timing of epiphysial fusion of Iranian wild pigs

The sequences of epiphysial fusion of domestic and wild pigs seem to be similar (Habermehl, 1975; Silver, 1969; Bull and Payne,

1982). The tuber scapulae, distal humerus, proximal radius and acetabulum fuse first, then comes the second group with fusion of the distal tibia, distal metapodials and tuber calcanei. They are followed by a group of late fusing epiphyses consisting of the proximal humerus, proximal and distal ulna, distal radius, proximal and distal femur and proximal tibia (Habermehl, 1975;

Silver,1969). The sequence given by Bull and Payne for Turkish wild pig is slightly different. Proximal femur seems to fuse relatively earlier in Turkish wild pig and calcaneum relatively later (Bull and Payne, 1982). A similar sequence can be observed in wild pigs from the Netherlands (Wijngaarden-Bakker and

Maliepaard, 1982).

45 Epiphysial fusion data for the sample of Iranian wild pigs are given in Table 3 (566 2.57)- In group 2 animals (4-11 months

old), only the tuber scapulae is starting to fuse. In group 3 animals (12-14 months old), the acetabulum and tuber scapulae

have fused, while the proximal radius and distal humerus are

fusing. In group 7 animals (27-35 months old), the proximal

radius, distal humerus, distal tibia and metatarsals III and IV

have fused. Metacarpals III and IV, proximal femur, and tuber

calcaneum are fusing or fused, distal and proximal ulna remain

unfused, or are fusing or fused, the distal femur is fusing or

fused, the distal radius, proximal humerus and proximal tibia are

unfused, fusing o fused. All epiphyses have fused in group 8

animals (older than 35 months).

The Iranian sample is small. There is no specimen which falls

into any group between 3 and 7 which would represent a period

from 14 months to 27 months old. There is a 13 months gap.

Therefore, we could only say that the distal tibia fused sometime

between 14 and 27 months old. The proximal femur, tuber

calcaneum, proximal and distal ulna, distal femur, distal radius,

proximal humerus and proximal tibia started to fuse after 27

months of age (566 p^* 2 5 7]).-

When comparing the results drawn from such a small sample with so

little available information, it might be suggested that fusion

might be later in wild pigs than in domestic pigs, particularly

in early fusing epiphyses. Table 2 is a comparison of the timing

of epiphysial fusion in the Iranian sample with various other

sources (see p

^ages b 3 ~ 59 show the metrical data for the Hakel and Iranian s a m p l e s .

2.3. Components of variation in wild pig samples from Hakel and from Iran

According to Payne and Bull (1988), the variation in measurements within a population can be thought of as made up of three basic

components: 1) Age-related variation; 2) Sex-related variation

3) Individual variation.

Age-related variability is demonstrated by differences in mean

measurement between groups of animals of different ages.

Generally, these reflect growth; some measurements increase with

age; some increase very rapidly, some reach relatively stable

size fairly early in life and some measurements decrease with

age .

47 Sex-related variation is shown by differences in mean as well as in some absolute measurements between males and females of the same age. There are also additional contrasts in the case of castrates.

Individual variation is the remaining variation shown within a sample of animals of the same age and sex from a particular population. This type of variation may itself reflect genetic and environmental components as well as any observer error. Variation

in different measurements can be compared by using coefficients

of variation.

The relative importance of these different components in

influencing variation differ widely between different measurements.

The large sample of wild pig skulls from Hakel illustrates these

three components of variation when the sample is subdivided into

groupsof animals of the same sex and similar age. Although the

sample of postcranial skeletons is rather small it is enough to

indicate some less variable measurements.

2.3.1. Age-related variation (Pag£s ,60, 67 )

Age-related variability in cranial measurements is shown by

comparing the 36 Group 4 males with the 14 Group 7 males, and 27

Group 4 females with the 40 Group 7 females (.pg. 60),, It is

important to remember that this comparision only includes part of

48 the whole lifespan as it only measures change between 14-18

months (the age of Group 4 animals) and the 27-35 months (the age

of the Group 7 animals). Total age-related variability is clearly

much greater.

| As TVcAe A indicates (p^. 6Q) parametric tests (t tests) do not show

[ j significant differences in tooth width measurements except for

1 three measurements in males which are significant at the 0.05

level. The reason why widths are less affected is that they are

measured at the base of the enamel crown, which is comparatively

unaffected until a late stage.

Tooth lengths decrease by 5-9% in males and 4-11% in females as a

result of tooth wear and interdental attrition. This also

explains why the tooth row and associated lengths decrease with

age. Thus, t tests show significant decreases at the 0.01 level

2. for all tooth lengths, only H L in males is at the 0.05 level.

Tooth row measurements decrease with age. For example, the

measurements of 29 and 9a show 1-4% decrease in females and 1-8%

decrease in males (significant at 0 .0 1 ). P^-P^ row is an

[ exception. This measurement shows a 4% increase in males and 3%

increase in females. This can be explained by the place of P^. in

the jaw. It is not joined to the P 2 “ P4 row an<^ *s *n

infradental area. Since this area increases with, age P^ moves

further away from the rest of the premolar row.

As page.60 shows, the upper and lower jaw measurements are larger

in older animals: Measurements such as 5, 11, 8, 12, 16b, A, 14,

49 and B show increases of 9-23% in males and 9-14% in females.

Parametric t tests show significant increases at the 0.01 level

(0.05 in the case of P1-P4 in females) in all dimensions except

for the measurement C. Measurement C (angle of ramus) is

unaffected by age, with only 1% decrease in males and 1%

increase in females.

The number of postcranial measurements is too small to make any

useful age comparison. However, it is generally believed that postcranial growth ends with epiphysial fusion, but as Payne and

Bull point out the epiphysial structures permits rapid early growth in length, but growth continues in the width of the articulations and shafts and in bones without epiphyses, and this remodelling may continue throughout the animal's lifespan (Payne and Bull, 1988).

2.3.2. Sex-related variation (Pages 61,67)

Sex-related variability can be assessed by comparing the 40 Group

7 females with the 14 Group 7 males, and the 32 Group 2 females

with the 53 Group 2 males.

Parametric t tests do not show any significant dimorphism in

tooth width measurements (pg. 61).

Tooth lengths and tooth row measurements show a small dimorphism;

2 -7% and 1-4% in Group 7 animals, 1-2% and 0-1% in Group 2

animals respectively. As it is seen tn Table 5(pg. dimorphism is

significant in Group 7 animals (at the 0.01and 0.05 levels).

This might be partly because of an age-related change is involved

50 within the group as the range of estimated age for Group 7 is 27-

35 months (see pg 44).

Jaw measurements again show the greatest differences.

Measurements such as 5, 11, 12,16b, A, 14, 3, 4, 6, B show 5-27% differences in Group 7 animals and 1-10% in Group 2 animals.

Measurement C (angle of ramus) is not much different in both sexes; it is 2% smaller in Group 7 animals and 1% smaller in

Group 2 animals. There are significant differences between males and females in almost all jaw measurements at the 0.01 level

(0.05 in the case of measurement C).

In the postcranial skeletons the sex-related variability can be assessed by comparing fused elements; the differences in fused forelimbs is 3-16% and in hindlimbs 1-16%. Parametric t tests show significant differences (at the 0.01 and 0.05 levels) for almost half of the fused element measurements (pg« 61). t

2.3.3. Individual variation ('pages 62^67).

The remaining individual variation can be demonstrated by comparing the largest groups of animals of the same sex and similar age. Two examples for individual variation for cranial measurements are shown on page 62 Forty Group 7 females and fourteen Group 7 males.

As seen in the table, tooth width measurements, tooth lengths and tooth row measurements show smaller variation. Coefficients of variation are for tooth widths 3.2-.5.3 in Group 7 females and

3.2-5.1 in Group 7 males; for tooth lengths 4.5-6.6 in Group 7

51 females, 3.4-5.9- in Group 7 males; for tooth row measurements

3.2-4.8 in Group 7 females, and finally, 3.4-3.5 in Group 7 males.

The coefficients of variation are higher in upper and lower jaw measurements: 2.1-8.4 in Group 7 females,and 2.8-9.5. in Group 7 males. The coefficients of variation for the measurement C is

2.8. for both females and 3.7 for males.

Individual variability in postcranial measurements can be assessed by comparing the five Group 7 females and the three

Group 8 males. Table 6 indicates that coefficents of variation are between 1.4-9.2 for forelimb, and 1.8-5.10.7 for hindlimb measurements in the case of females; and 2.0-15.2 for forelimb, and 2 .0-8.6 for hindlimbs of males 62.)*

The relatively marked variation in highly age-related upper and

lower jaw measurements and postcranial measurements is, most probably, due to the fact that some age-related variation is

included; the ages of these animals probably being in the range

of 7-8 months. Thus, some age-related variation may well be

included in the variability shown by these groups, although this

is relatively small. As a result, we can assume that this type of

variation usually follows a normal distribution and any skewing

is usually relatively minor and can be ignored for most purposes.

These results are summarized in Tab. 7 ar\cJ Fig. 2/1* 2 (pgs. 64)..

should be born in mind that the sample size for postcranial

elements is small, and that, therefore, the figures which come from postcranial data should be treated with caution.

52 I j j 2 2 VT) 2 2 3 2 2 'OlOTI (X O. Q>t-> *o I I— kj ~ ~ —~ ->»♦-«-»*-» wut I I o uin»n»»-i— *O^M •—^ * U I I I 'OTJ X33CT3TJ l IO.I l IQ. — M M M et I I i a a i C C C C •* C C CCCCCC C (un H * * w to ^ ut^ TTJ I It'D U* i- o>N-» ttf D t I >t>t>CD #» > -o > *o >tj bitj nrrrHtc-nr**- *-u* m ,» u u * tn — ^ > o- -' *» to » to *-»cn

_ _ ■ — N| M U) U M fsO CO *0 K> Ul ~ K> •• __ _ „ —■> N)‘ ^QwbnoOT'uiN^crtOduaDAxr^^tr^o^w^A^Ae^^^vi^MN^uto* Kj fB «• UJ U) <* KJ K) M LA K) * ■• NJ Ut N U N> U> Oh m* N>

iiiiikiiititiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiittiiitiiiiitiiiiii M « < r L i ^ m0 m 0 ^ K>w K>0 ^ 0 (r9,|U N ) 0 's ir0 sN)N>nMirL/iA*UK> A ^0 U)GD»A«a * CijN)U1 0 yU)Uli«wUi>-A 0 (DCDMueDu>^9t^N^U)k)» ■ ••*M^t«*««oe9«i«okeBi^aBtAK»^uios<*^Meu(Oooi^oaDeuieuiui^opuioooep

^ f ! ? ! U i ^ ! ^ ^ ^ ! s)U,V,^ K u w u r j 9 t u U,lJ ^ 9'U u UUUIU UW UIUUtlAfO UIUIUIUI^»gUUIK)UUC/i AMMMMWAAItt^WOUAUlUWMMi^A^wuiUUICDbAA^fgUIAAfcjaBAUIUIUIBQDODUICPAf^UI

lji n n z a m m i^rjirzm r. r. « — — w ^ r . "* >- w w ^ u> ^ ^ M flhkAivuu^w uiuAis»N »cD

NOuiMO*w«K»*0iK»uiflBN»Nko^N>wOMMbMLNoeouiMeiAeuiuiMeuioeuifcAu)pieu)eui

“ • • “ “ " “ W » K) • mm —• mm A N> MO m K) CO K> ^ • «» CD A A -Dtf *• CM 4k m» CO OD CO IO A 9 QD A 9« 0> CM A LJ O ^ ^ w J>* p P ^ Jj ^ p CM CM Ki K) o p O **0 IO 09 09 w 9** CM w ro ^ b ^O U) » O Cl O O (T mm GO 09 W ^ 00 CM CD CM O O O O O O Nl O>9tMOBUI09«MOMC»Mioe,C«»MMOUIUIOMtOOKlOOOUIUIO9O9OOOOe

• ^ ^ - - K J f « - — *■» — — _ UN)MM^UN»«»«^UU^wM*«*(o^MC>*9tgD*UICUIUUO ^ p p p p P P pO Nl (B * p •« B Nl ci a cm O CO CO O * CO CM —4 8) CO 9 ^ CM 9 B *w M CO ~ m* O rvj x N4 bg ci O O M IM 90N U *O n UlMUI^OtfOM99UUIlMV«MD^9UIOUiyOy^*«**k4CMNUI'^aWMlOOM

^ I*PPPP?PP®P®p*PPOpp*0 9«*MOOOlO«*MMU) O B ^ O' CM A A Co B B CM Ul CM O' O) 9% (O ^ 09 Ul CO B o CO CO O B B CD B O Ok b O Ul CO O m «■»

^ y,P ^^|fcp^PPPPpPpppPppW pW pUpO>AwMlOMW lMUIMMOI«UI»»MMO'0>l— UW © S D O O A M M W M O C D w ^M M lM C IC D U kO U lO B B G9 CO A 0 *0 (S kO O 'oj O Ul •“ O ^ CM X m > O O Ul CO •• CM

D mIM * m ak mO B D «909k9'UI*CMUieo*KlDOb^*OUI'BUIUIUI*» •w^0M 9'UlUIUlM«oBiACMM9'UIUIO«>uiUtiJM*»UI**wUOecO«»«»MM*AM«»a* sI ^ U I U I - U I O - m U I M U U m U U U W ^ m K I U N U I0 m»w W to

i N ;w iiti-N O »L.o^o«L,«oi.;loi.ltoL,«oooiou-e«oU oM oo«lt«L,oU i » i » i i » « i t i » ♦ i i i » i > i i i i « i i i > > i i i i i > ♦ » » « » ltj » »« 1 ♦ » »

o m ot ci ki ni La ^ o Io a !o ^ o o ^ *o o u» La cn o Ni ’o ^ o o e'e o o o o ic o io cn ui o o o o 1m o cn o o o.

m» •• ■“ ■* — M m mm mm m w m CO > N) mm ^ KI CO K) ^ «• m «J CO CO ^ m Ok A K> mm K) ^ B O CM CM B CM (O CO O S CM * KI pp p B p s jB M ptMMBkOABiMBBA O A CO OD OD O CM A *0 CM O 09 CT* CM pp p p p p p p p p p B B B O MO CM CM B B B CM MO M 9 ^ B CO O CM Ml B CO B CM KI O KI B CM 09 M CD O CM «0 M O

O O O O pO O O M*«OOOOOOKI**OOOi>M*OOOK)*«»KICI* 0 O M IM *MU«M^ONOW W Op 09KI«0lMiMM0bAOeBBBUIUIMBr«0<^BB*KI«0^B^BW ^BU IB*K>KlBU »D **O *B«BU IB'0

M M M *M 0kM m *uiM M 0iM M M BO (0iM M W 0»0iM M W M i0C 0W CM U CI^^t09B^l40M O CD B CM CO CM

Ul A B MM A K| r o MO CD CM CM m O MO MO 9 B 9 ^ m CO (B B iO ^ to A Ol CO Ul CO O CM ^O ^ mm wO ^ VI OK Ul B M O B * B B

«■ KI Cl KI Ul O Ot Ul (MOUn MDDOOONOBCM

0= CD II *1 9 l> O IO O flu — *■► Mo r-IM Oo ^O (UIDCDrtOirtl'CI V 3 C « C ^ B a <

•• to to c» ••• fe m < o ft*

to in im

53 a l 32 Gop aito in Groupvariation cranial aeasurements wild ofthe from sample pig Hakel Table 3.2:

54 b e .: ru vrain n rna •aueet o tt wl pg ape ra Hakel froa saapie tfte of pig wild •easure«ents cranial in variation Group 3.3:ibie

55 a l 34 Gop aito in Groupvariation cranial leasureients the wildsaiple froi of pig Hakel Table 3.4:

56 Ul u k 4 1 ai ai m N) ^N) Jt id UIOUIO UIOUIO — O kA M kA O m ft< ft< n O IO O 3 * W ' 4 U l U l *<• o Oi til k ui k * «k I T O 0 * ® w in fO (J Ul M *S| *S| M Ul (J . o n Ui og sj N» sj og Ui o Od o Od ^ Z. ^ fO IO ^ fO • ^ (O ? U l IQ Ol q id n • in • n in 3 ^ fO ID O ID 3 ^ fO =- * * cr e e cr a* O S» O S» e ai ai *-• «u “O © O WO o ST -o o ST WO m A U)UI» UIM A^NPUIUIM 9 m m rp Ul «• 4b Ul M Ul 4b «• Ul — ©■> K) — O «— ©■> U t m * kh)UIN)UIK> 4 ■ tn m it in *> in it SU O VO V Na4k*->^QK)K)eo 9 a 0 sj 9 o ui o ui o ui

k > e v m m muiouiuiuiuiuououceui'/ioui k0 KI M U *4 ao a ao kU»'«gm«^kj^ iA o oB iA Ul O O) Ul M OB M KJ eo KJ M OB M 3 4 e tr* k 0 »sj* 4 » LA •- sO O CD A GO O lkA O* 57 9 IM 0 — ^ 9 0 •» UM k UM •» 3 H — O — Ul U) O O a N W vO » «AMBUIU|M*U|(/|M DU«*Oi 6 0 •• M <«d o ^ •• flD M sj»• <«d o >a ki cr* 1 0 M ooeuiooeouiuio kK»*.oB^i^a»«r> 4 ACT«A>OO^CD«»U)9i*BOW^*WM^OMM ® O Ul O OD * — 4k ^ N) 4k A K> Kj K) U Ul ej * Ul K> A CJ OD m (B ui ui o o ui ui o oui 9 OUlUUUIUIUlOUIOOUl 9 la kO ui er» ej o o a ej er» ee A W U I U I i A O M » >• * u» m — u» ^ un * 03 >• 4 4 k *UlQMNiUl®U®N4UI'^A^®*K}v«^CDJkUJOa *o m ui o •— •• *o «“ uj 4 ^ ui so a o Ul Ut o Ul Ul o Ul Ul o Ut Ul o •• K> CD * r\> CO Q CO * r\> CD K> •• gD gD 9 m 9 9 9 9 9 0 m 9 0 OOUlUIOUIUIUUIUIOOUIOUlm 9 9 ( O»*O»-*UIUk0UU4*MUKlUUIMUIVIKI ui o o o o o o s- ui IS kD k£ ^ k£ kD IS ® A%J,_A,"ONiK*'

Total volition Variation in selected age groups Table 3.6: 6roup variation in postcranial aeasureients of the wild pig saiple froa Iran ¥ S 58

33.0 a l 37 Groupvariation 3.7:Table

W M W U CJ M M •— A KJ f« Ol C M M •• — — in rs» — * (A OD w> ««i 0 Ot O *1 KI s nd OD ui ui o ui in o e ui u so in I postcranialaeasureients the of froi wiIdp pig saipleIran

ut 5 M in

Is* "• m |g M

KI i# U W KI KI KI M K) iO CO « ui in I I Ul K» 3 ui in u» Ul Ul ui ui e m ui is m w M N> M A A Ul h) U KI

~ F “ - ?S»S5i SSSStSS S SS S Si S £ 8 2 S3 3 2 in o in

"> u o KI KI ui Ul Ul CD Kg

Ul o CD SO Ul O

IK* O

SO KI uS KI hi Ul

59 Table 4: Age-related variation m the aeasureients ot the wild pig saiple froi Hakel

I -1 8 S

6 2 * 2 * I * {z ’ ’ • • •* f > 2 . . ’ 31 r“

*0 z *0 8 8 I-*- IP I-*- VO *- VO U u i i n • i i a a i a a i i 88 ^8 8 K £ K a a D UKWPM wM^PUl k ^ * KI KI ww i

# 8 8 8 *+ ++ m* ++ *+ 2 2

*TJ ki ob

* ki z

*- ti z z

*-• *-• i a

db vm m 60 i i a i • i a i • i a i i K-Ul * *K-Ul U P * -*0 I * war war * jk » » w w » » PTPPHPPPt- PTPPHPPPt- u m k z a a*_ a ) ( AuzzztvzzzvD i lai • i a i • lai i AuzzztvzzzvD *uzzztD zzzw *uzzztD tjt ) ) * aaa -^ -^ p 71 zt p p m

m 11 z 1 a.a a.a otj • v* * u u * v* h

m IS.t 14 14.1 13.9 14 13.1 c c is c c* c c c c c *Tec c c *Tec c c c c c*c c V • >T> V > is V > c c cv > Q» 9 > V > zxzzz w M M M M w

f t r’fl ft II * »» *• Vf n ? It t d«»dp VLVVVi * i V wa V a V a L *0*0 V * x a acTi 131 1 • 9X322WV & Cl &fll * V W •• 2 2 3 X 9 . a *ow a *o •« a a a a. ut 4- * - * * - M - * p ' c f ' * p p p p i » i > 5 > 5 ‘ S «• « c iTV C C M Cum * * u * m m w2 62 t t • at at w k

> • ^ w ^ * "0

T “• ^3 o. 3 'O 1. 1 ft X « 3 j a w

^5 - m to n * * M » M m w WMIIHN TJ MH U •Q’etiv a i i aa i *•* i i n H v» *o *- v HUI

UtV'

al 6 Idvda vrain n h eaueet o te id i sil Io Hakel Iroe saiple pig wild the ol eeasureaents the in variation Individual 6; fable Age-related variation Sex-related variation Individual variation

Tooth width Nil Nil Low/aoderate aeasureaents 1-4Z decrease in aales 0-51 in 6roup 7 4-51 in 6roup 2 feaales 0-2Z decrease and 0-2Z in Group 2 4-5Z in Croup 2 aales increase in soae teeth 1-5Z in Group 7 feaales teeth in females 3-5Z in Croup 7 aales

Tooth length Decrease Low/aoderate . .low/aoderate aeasureaents 5-9Z in aales 2-7Z in 6roup 7 4-6Z in Croup 7 feaales 4 - U Z in females 1-2Z in 6roup 2 3-62 in Croup 7 aales

Tooth row Decrease Low/aoderate Low/aoderate aeasureaents 1-8Z in aales 1-8Z in 6roup 7 3-4Z in Croup 7 feaales 1-4Z in females 0-3Z in Croup 2 3Z in Croup 7 aales

Upper/lover jaw Increase High High/aoderate aeasureaents 9-231 in aales 1-27Z in 6roup 7 2- 81 in Croup 7 feaales 9-141 in females 1- 51 in 6roup 2 2- 9Z in Group 7 aales

Foreliab High Low/aoderate aeasureaents 3-16Z 1- 9Z in feaales 2-15Z in aales Hindliab High/moderate Low/aoderate aeasureaents 1-13Z 1-102 in feaales 2-8Z in tales

Table 7: Components of variation in the aeasureaents within the wild pig samplesfroa Hakel a n d V a n

* •».! • a.i a « i.i • i.) ♦ a.i

hindliabs

■ Females a Hales

Figure 2.1: Log ratio histograas illustrating variation in the aeasureaents o? +heirania.n wild pig sample

63 tooth rows

upper permanent tooth lengths

lover ailk tooth widths

upper tilk tooth widths

permanent tooth widths

Log ratio •-J • cfj • ill • • o!i ♦ ill •

fetales a Hales

Figure 2.2: Log ratio histograas illustrating variation in the teasureaents in the Hakel wild pig saiple

64 3. Discussion

?he purpose of this chapter is to consider within-population rariability in some skeletal parameters in Sus in relation to age and to sex. When measuring bones and teeth, and when using and interpreting measurements, it is important to remember that the skeleton is not an inert framework, but a living structure, each part of which is constantly growing and changing.

As previously discussed, variation can be thought of as including three components: age-related variation, sex-related variation and individual variation, each being variable and effecting different measurements in different ways. The Hakel data show that tooth width masurements are likely to provide the most ieliable comparision for separating larger wild from smaller domestic animals as they remain relatively stable. Tooth lengths and tooth row measurements diminish in older animals as the teeth become more worn, and they show low to moderate sexual dimorphism vhich is higher in adults than young animals. Upper and lower jaw neasurements in pigs show high age-related variation and high sexual dimorphism. Differences, in general, are greater in older animals compared with young animals. This is , presumably, caused by the males having larger canines than females. Postcranial neasurements present more problems as these bones are less common than teeth in most archaeological samples and they show considerable age related size increase and sexual dimorphism. The effects of age-related size increase can be reduced by eliminating specimens with incomplete epiphysial union, but this

65 often further reduces the sample size. Forelimb measurements appear to be more variable than hindlimb measurements with high age-related variation and greater sexual dimorphism, probably reflecting the males' shoulder to shoulder fighting activity.

According to Payne and Bull, even though there are significant differences between the measurements for separate groups, it may not be possible to separate them in mixed samples. Bimodality starts to be apparent when means are separated by 3 or 4 standard deviations, only then is it possible to assign most specimens to

one group or another (Payne and Bull, 1988, Table 5, Figure 3).

When one group is more abundant than the other, the resulting

combined distribution is skewed and bimodality may not be clearly apparent until the means are further separated. The absence of

bimodality does not mean that two groups are not present, and in the absence of bimodality, a relatively high coefficient of

variation may give some indication of heterogeneity (Payne and

Bull, 1988).

Tab, 3 and Fig. 3-1-2 _ (pgs- 67- 63) show the effects of mixing different

proportions of some measurements from the Hakel sample. Clear

bimodality can be seen when combining the measurement 5 of two

groups of animals of different age. The means of two groups

(Group 7 and 2) are separated by 12.3 mm and 15.6 mm standard

deviations in females and males respectively. Combined

distributions of forty Group 7 females and fourteen Group 7

males are skewed. Their means are separated by 8.3 mm. Tooth

lengths again show skewing or bimodality when two different age

•> 66 groups are combined, so does tooth row measurement (P 2. - P ^ l / d p 2 ”

dp^. In this case the means are separated by 1.2-1.7 mm. They do

not show any sexual bim odality. The various combinations of tooth

widun measurements (in this case it is MjWA) indicate neither

bim odality nor skewing. In any combination the means separated by

not more than 1.2 mm.

6roup 2 6roup 2 Group 7 6roup 7 Feaale Hale Feiale Hale N H SD CV N h SD CV N H SD CV N H SD CV (n-1) (n-i) (n-1) (n-1)

Heasuresents 5 32 70.9 7.3 10.2 52 9.1 40 91.2 4.8 5.2 14 106.5 5.3 4.9 P l'fV dP2"dP'4 32 38.8 1.9 4.8 52 39.2 1.3 3.3 40 37.4 1.3 3.4 14 37.6 1.3 3.4 HlL 32 18.5 0.8 4.3 51 18.9 0.7 3.7 40 16.2 0.8 4.9 14 16.8 0.7 4.1 HtUA 32 11.1 0.5 4.5 52 11.2 0.5 4.4 37 11.2 0.6 5.3 14 11.0 0.5 4.5

6roup 2 resale and Hale cosbined 6roup 7 resale and Hale cosbined

N H SD CV N H SD CV (n-1) (n-1)

Heasuresents 5 84 71.5 6.9 9.6 54 95.2 8.3 8.7 CO P2-PA/dp/rdp4 84 39.0 1.5 CO 54 37.5 1.3 3.4 ‘ HiL 83 18.8 • 0.8 4.2 54 16.3 0.8 4.9 HtUA 84 11.2 0.5 4.4 51 11.1 0.6 5.4

Group 2 and 7 resales cosbined Group 2 and 7 Hales cosbined Group 2 and 7 resales and Hales cosbin

N H SD CV N H SD CV N H SD CV (n-1) (n-1) (n-1)

Heasuresents 5 72 82.1 12.3 14.9 66 79.3 15.6 19.6 138 80.9 13.9 17.1 P2-Pij/ dp2-dpi4 72 38.1 1.7 4.4 66 38.8 1.4 3.6 133 38.4 1.6 4.1 HiL 72 17.2 1.4 8.1 66 IB.4 1.2 6.5 138 17.8 1.4 7.8 72 11.2 0.6 5.3 66 11.1 1.2 6.3 135 11.2 0.5 4.4

Table B: The statistical effects of coabining sose of the groups for sose seasuresents in the Hakel sasple

67 3.1: The statistical effects of coabining soie of the groups for aeasureaents of dpg-dp^/P^Pij and 5 in the Hakel sanpl 68

■i Group 2 feiales E3 Group 7 Feaales I I I Group 2 Males E3Group 7 Males HfiwrfMat V

crrza.

%

Itiwrnentt; 10.0 11.0 12.0 1 3 .0 14.0 1 5 .0 16.0 1 7 .0 18.0 19.0 20.0 3 0 .0 in mm)

Figure 3.2: The statistical effects of coabining soae of the groups for aeasureaents of H^UA and HjJ. in the Hakel saaple J P 6roup 2 Feaales g g Group 7 Feaales □ Group 2 Hales E3 Group 7 Males

The biological realities have to be considered in the

interpretation of metrical data and in the choice of which

measurement to take. It is important to be aware of the different

kinds of information given by different measurements. As

discussed above, some measurements are less variable and better

size indicators. Among those discussed here, tooth widths

seem particularly useful in having low sexual dimorphism and

low age-related variation and therefore are particularly suitable

for looking for separations between wild and domestic populations

and for comparing heterogeneity in different samples; also, for

69 looking at genetically-based size changes as they are, generally, less affected by environmental factors than postcranial measurements. Among postcranial measurements, humerus

HCT, radius BpP, ulna LPA, pelvis LAR, tibia BdP, Bfd, astragalus GL1, Glm and LA seem to be useful, as, a) they are usually more commonly found in archaeological samples, b) they are measurable in specimens that are too battered for other measurements to be taken, c) they show relatively less sex 4 and/or age-related variation (Payne and Bull, 1988). The log ratio technique used in this paper allows us to look at different measurements in relation to each other and to compare the indications given by different measurements, and brings out the differences in distribution and proportion ( p g s . 70).

Finally, measurement distributions, especially when the realities of skeletal biology and growth are better understood, are likely to provide us with valuable additional information about animal populations and man-animal relationships.

70 CHAPTER V

VARIATION IN SKELETAL ELEMENTS BETWEEN WILD PIG POPULATIONS (Appendix: Pages 25 8 31^-34^)

In this chapter modern populations from various parts of the world are examined in order to attempt to evaluate environmental

influences on populations and to establish what the phenotype of modern wild forms living in various environments and econiches is.

Modern Examples

Values for different measurements of 1 primitive domestic and 20

wild pig samples from various parts of the world are compared by means of common standards, based on measurements of the Hakel

pigs (in the case of cranial measurements) and Iranian pigs (in

the case of postcranial measurements), by the log ratio method

(Simpson,Roe and Lewontin,1960) and by the "size and shape"

statistic of Penrose (1954). All the measurements taken were

analysed and the results are presented on pa^es between 81 andi

107 . Metrical data are not given for the samples which consist of

less than 5 specimens. Interpretation was made on the basis of

reliable measurements^ i.e - mainly tooth widths. In the case of

postcranial measurements comparison is based on some of the most

commonly used measurements, such as pelvis LAR, astragalus GL1,

GLm and recently introduced measurements such as humerus HCT

(Payne and Bull, 1988), radius B , ulna LPA, tibia Bfd, and

astragalus LA. The application of the log ratio technique and

these standard measurements to various pig samples showed the

71 existence of some differences between these samples and the

samples from Hakel and Iran.

1. Ziguinchor, West Africa: (Appendix : Pages 258v 314)

Ziguinchor is a small village located in Senegal, between Gambia

and Portuguese Guinea (pg-80). It was a Portuguese colony in the

16th century. The pigs living in this area are primitive domestic

animals who freely wander in the village and eat whatever they i can find (personal communication with P.Ducos, December 1987). 31

cranial specimens examined showed a clear separation from the

Hakel specimens. As it is seen in tables and -figures bn pages 81^ i I 104,121 Ziguinchor pigs are much smaller than the Hakel ones, 8- i i 23 % in tooth widths. ! ■ ,

2 .Tunisia: (Appendix : Pages 160, 515).

5 cranial specimens collected from the Messuna mountains also

showed differences from the Hakel animals. Most of the

measurements of Tunisian population are smaller than those of

the Hakel ones, 3-10 % in tooth widths (pgs. 82,104,121).

3. Spain: (Appendix : Pages 2 61^ 3 1 6)

6 cranial specimens came from the Andalusia area in southern I Spain. Differences are again considerable between Spanish and

Hakel wild pigs, all measurements show that the Spanish pigs are

smaller than Hakel ones (tooth widths 4-13%). (p3&- $^104,121).

72 t' N 4. Italy: (Appendix : Pages 262, 317)

This sample consists of 27 cranial specimens. The largest part of the material came from Sardinia and a few from central Italy.

(Personal communication with Azzeroli, September 1986).

Measurements show that they are smaller ^han their Hakel counterparts (1-18% in tooth widths). ( , 1 0 4 , . f i l V '

I 5 . F r a n c e : ( A p p e n d i x : P a g e s £ 6 4 , ^>18*)

5 cranial specimens examined in this research came from the southern part of France. Tooth width measurements seem to be 0-7% smaller than those of the Hakel ones (pgs. 86, . 1C4J).

6. Netherlands: (Appendix: Pages 26.5,, 266, .319, 320)

18 cranial and 13 postcranial specimens examined in the present study are from the south and central parts of the country

(Brunderink, 1977; Wijngaarden-Bakker and MaHierpaard 1982 and personal communication with G.Smeenk, September,1986). Tables

and figures-on pages < 86, 104, and ljll compare the cranial measurements of wild pigs from the Netherlands with those from Hakel. As seen in

the tables and figures, the two samples do not seem to be

noticeably different from each other. Pages on 87 ,107, / show the differences between postcranial measurements of wild

pigs from Netherlands and those from Iran. The Dutch wild -pigs

seem to be smaller than those from Iran.

73 7. Germany: (Appendix: Pages 267-231; 3 2 1 -"53 0)

Besides the Hakel material examined in detail in the previous chapter, three more samples were examined coming from this part of the world. Two of these samples are quite large and homogeneous and were treated separately to see if there are any differences between these populations living separately in close and similar environments. The third sample is smaller and comes from various parts of Germany.

One of the large samples consisted of 135 cranial specimens from

Schleswig Holstein, a large hunting area near Kiel in northwest of Germany (personal communication with G.Heidemann, October,

1 9 8 6 ) .

The other large sample was from Darss and consisted of 101 cranial specimens. Darss is a little isolated peninsula located within the province of Rostock, in northeastern Germany, south of the Baltic Sea. Darss is a mixed forest. There is no agricultural land for crops around the area, but some meadows for domestic stock (personal communication with M.Stubbe, January, 1987).

Finally, 39 cranial and 17 postcranial skeletal elements were collected in various parts of Germany.

The results of the analyses of these three samples show that they are not different from the Hakel pigs (see. pages 38 J 30; 31, 1 O k

3nd 121 for dieta.iA.sV However, postcranial measurements shows that they are slightly smaller from the Iranian wild pigs ( pgs-

33, 107, 121).

74 8. Austria: (Appendix: Paiges 232,331)

20 cranial specimens were analysed. They are all from the eastern part of Austria (personal communication with E.Pucher, November,

1986). Austrian wild pigs seem to be larger than Hakel pigs.

Tables and {\gures on pgs. Slj 105 3tir\d 111 show the differences between

Austrian and Hakel samples. They are 0-7% larger in tooth widths.

9. Hungary: (Appendix: Page^ 233v332)

There was only 1 cranial specimen available for examination.

Pa^e 105 shows that all the measurements of this adult specimen are much larger than Hakel specimens except for some of the tooth length measurements and the measurement C.

10. Poland: (Appendix: Paiges 233 f 3 3 2 )

2 cranial specimens are from Galicia, among the Carpathian mountains of south-eastern Poland. Fv^ure A*2. 105) shows the differences between the measurements of these two cranial specimens and those of the Hakel ones. Polish animals seem to be larger compared with the Hakel pigs.

11. Czchechoslovakia: (Appendix: Pages 233, 332)

The only cranial specimen came from Slovakia, south of the country. This specimen displays the same kind of affinities as the Hungarian one (pcj. 105).

75 12. Romania: (Appendix: Pages 2 8 4 , 33.2 )

4 cranial specimens examined here came from various parts of

Romania. Page 105 shows that these animals are also larger than

the Hakel ones.

14. Turkey: (Appendix: Pages 285-288; 333-334)

47 cranial and 20 postcranial specimens were examined. The

largest part of the material came from Klzilcahamam, north central Turkey (Payne and Bull, 1988). The rest of the material

is from various parts of Turkey; from the Bolu mountains, northwest of Turkey; from the Antalya region, southwest of

Turkey, and from Elazig, east of Turkey. Wild pigs live almost anywhere in Turkey, from Thrace to various parts of Anatolia,

from sea level up to 2000-2500 m. above sea level. They are shot

by the villagers because of the damage they do to crops

(Kumerlove, 1975 and personal observations).

Tables and figures on pages 93,105 and 121 show that the Turkish wild pigs are a little larger than the Hakel ones. The differences are 2-11 % in tooth widths. Table 19.2; and Figure 5

(pgs.94,107) are about the differences between Turkish and

Iranian wild pigs. It seems that Turkish wild pigs are not much different from their Iranian counterparts.

14. Israel: (Appendix: Pages 289-295; 335-338)

The material examined here is from the northern part of the country; namely from the Upper Galilee and Hula regions, and

76 some were from the central part of the country. The wild pig had already been recorded in these regions by Tristam (1866), who

said that they used to live in thickets by the Jordan and the

Dead Sea, extending even to the bare wilderness of Judea.

Bodenheimer1s (1958) observations (which are obviously valid today) showed that they occur in Upper Galilee, especially in the

Hula thickets, but have disappeared from the coastal plain. Hart

(1891) saw them near Beersheba and found them abundant on the

northern Negev between the Ghar and Gaza. Tables and figures on pages 95, 106 and 121 compare the cranial measurements of wild

pigs from Israel with those of Hakel pigs. As seen in the tables, the wild pigs from Israel are also slightly larger than the

Hakel ones (0-9% in tooth widths). However, they seem to be smaller than the Iranian wild pigs, 10-11% in front limbs and 3-

13% in hind limbs (pgs. 96. 107, 121).

15. Iraq: (Appendix: Pages 296, 339).

12 cranial and 4 postcranial elements came from B a g h d a d ,

Baradost and Amara. The material was colleted by Reed i n 1 9 5 4 - 5 5

(personal communications with Reed, April, 1987 ) . The p r i n c i p a l habitats of wild pigs in this region are within the f o l l o w i n g

biotic provinces in Iraq / a. Alluvial plains and their waterways, which extend from the

Persian Gulf up to the Euphrates to Hit, on the Tigris to Samarra and to Ahwaz (altitude 0-600 ft) (Hatt 1959).

b. Kurdish mountains, with altitudes 1.000-14.000 ft., the forest

77 zone here extends 2.000-14.000ft.in elevation, and is an open

Oakland (Hatt, 1959). They have been reported in abundance in the parts of the river valleys where there is sufficient cover, and they are occasionally reported on the open plains. They spend the summer in the mountain areas living on river bottoms,and in winter, in oak-woods on hill slopes (Hatt, 1959; Ainsworth 1838;

Metaxas 1891; Kinnear 1916; Pitman,1922; Cheesman,1920: Sanborn

1940; Thesiger,1954 ) . 0

Tables and figures on pages 97, 105 and 121 show that the wild pigs from Iraq are large* than Hakel wild pigs (3-12% in tooth widths) and they do not seem much different in size from the

Iranian pigs (pgs. 98, 107).

16. Iran: (Appendix: Pages 297, 340)

24 cranial and 15 postcranial elements were available for study (see pg 41 for details). The differences between Iranian and Hakel wild pigs can be seen on pages 99, 105 and 121.

The tables and the figures indicate that the Iranian pigs are also larger than the Hakel ones (1-10% in tooth widths).

17. India: (Appendix: Pages 298, 341)

16 cranial specimens examined in this research came from various parts of India. Some of the tooth width measurements of these animals are 0-7% larger than those of the Hakel ones while some of them 0-4% smaller (pgs. 100, 106, 121).

79 18. West Siberia: (Appendix: Pages 300, 342)

5 cranial specimens came from the Tunkinsk mountains, in western

Siberia. Wild pigs from this area seem to be larger than their counterparts from Hakel (1-14% in the tooth widths), (pgs. 101,

1 0 6 , 1 2 1 ) .

19. China: (Appendix: Pages 300, 343)

28 cranial specimens from China were analysed in the present research. Most of the material is from the eastern half of the country. Measurements do not show a considerble differences in size between the China and Hakel samples (pgs. 102, 106, 121).

20. Sumatra: (Appendix: Pages 301-306; 344-346).

93 cranial specimens from Sumatra were examined in the present study. Comparison of the measurements of the wild pigs from this part of the world with those from Hakel shows that the wild pigs from Sumatra are different from the Hakel pigs, they are much smaller (pgs. 103, 106, 121). where the modern pig material studied in this research came ■o

pc= postcranial le 3s Metrical data and comparisons of cranial measurements of modern pi‘3 sample from Ziguinchor

VinitiM IB ulMtri *gt fioupt le 10: Metrical data and comparisons of cranial measurements of modern wild piq sample from Tunisia with those from Hakel 82

14.1 I 13.5 13.1 340 4. 12.0 13.1 13.0 1.3 10.0 I 13.5 13.3 330 4 . IS.O-IO.f I7>3 3.4 13.0 2 16.5 16.5 16.5 16.5 333 4 14.017.1 |(.3 2.1 12.0 2 15.7 16.0 15.1 0.2 1.2 l(.l 213 5. 19.2 2 19.5-20.0 19.0 0.4 2.0 19.5 g| 4 bit? 11: Metrical data and comparisons of cranial measurements of modern wild pig sample' from Spain with those from Hakel w g i x ^^^3

tj

•—*

'w

2 z

u»x 83 » » *•»*»•- * w * * * * * * w a i i i a i i *a a a i i »>'S>,d>u*flprppHrprHHw**W w* 0 X U J I a a >lv>i)>C' S S S S £«JI £JSSSSi£fUNt-* £«JI S S S S L±± Z , ' Z . ? uL*±t±*

lotil variation Variation in sclrctfd ago group* I - 2 £ 1 ? £ s. v-n»*o**~ w wkjim •da* wx a: * w* *oz > I CCCCCC C C C C C C C I c * C C C C ceccce-ct C « c «Tc c « Jixsj.fo iniztTj'o Jixsj.fo 5;:nMSu,_s-::5(B,1^^K2x>,^52u,s,3 = .- suulol = y y O' M 52S2aSrr522S2.rr;gS3SS22.B;gf,S3grS35!J333;S2:*«5S !*!,,f^t**y*y***»**yy»>y*t.«»'*yjiyu****MS«(u!555u*jI*M|:uSisassssasssBgsaasiiSsSSsSsxsissisiHsSSisisSsrScsass - y ? ? ?? i!r o ^ y y v f d M O s« (B O M 5 - S S y

*o > Co J — N * I KJ U yr* v y r ?p^r y ^ y y p y y ? r y - y y y ? jrr? y *fyT r T T y W *« M u W O y • y y y ■ : : ? r° r- - ^ * > 3

c Id »7 171 I'll - I'tl t WUI Ul O O M O a s MMaMa»*i*aawMewa*MUi«u»o*uwMui«ww**u*ewauiui = s il;s 3 s ; s « r ? a « s= 2 sa = = x= 2 = = = = 3 • r p s p ;s ? ? = = ? = ?-«? = F°i? = P = r=iiss5 = i = ir^aii«p5:ai^ii 77 O p O*7“7* J * W W — O A W M O O i i W ^ i « W?r * W W O A S= p A « i 5 * l U= 5 I » » « D ^? ^T | 3 o S ! = -S = ? = = ;S3 = ? = SKyS*?JS5SSSSS: = J >

y y y y *o • O1 * 13 M O W O •• y y p r y ► ^ *«w^ prprnrrPH y y y y r t y — y = 55 y ?

r y tS C n w *T^ * 4> * t,*VVI-o 4»-S’ i ^ i * -a W » * u M M * W3C 3C * *0 TJ X *0 ^ M M u * » W = :: ?=? 5i5fis x a s i c ?? = ?? = = ?5Sii5afii5s o u o u u m o o i u i u o m r y y y y y y y3 yyy y y y y S S a s s S S ^ S B S S g | t « f S 5 S 8 ! S 5 S S = * r ! = * = i ? ? S = S S ■ ^* • ° - Ul o Q O o * j

u w > , a , o o u r u o o o w o ^ e 4 3- - g = E5sS;:s;sS?i ls,«s«5“x- S = ? 3 S •a yy ®yy PPfJ ? 3 1 m ii? i i S’S’ c*i e o e c*i ± ^L«i :• f a * s r :■ s r K :•a ^ E I U Ul • Is l 2

M

1 2 Mtia dt ad oprsn f rna maueet o mdr wl pg sample pig wild modern of measurements cranial of comparison and data Metrical 12: fo Iay ih hs fo Hakel from those with Italy from Table 13: Metrical data and comparisons of cranial measurements of modern wild pig sample from France with those from Hakel 85

Tot 11 vjrttlion Virntion in srlrctrtf Jjf groups ble 14.1: Metrical data and coaparisons of cranial aeasureaents of aodern wild pig saaple froa Netherlands with those froa Hakel \i a w t * :r « m *-*■ ^fOX**©* ■© *SXtJ SO X SO *SXtJ ■© ^fOX**©* *-*■ 3 S ou>ls>{r * m ►- *o u» S * T3 T3 TJ V *- » — I K> ►- I I ►- I K> | w | i m m m 86 OO o. o. i p ^<-»x x x *o T3 m v a i i a i • i a i m • vi T3 a a i i a i *o a »>* x x i ■ i • E ^<-»x O w- w- kj

cj IIISITJrt) a ■O'D »- »- »- * »- j * o> o> a C t t t t * c C C ? C * « C c «u»** n- •. «. w »Ote~ *. wx tfl IXUfl tfl wx *. »Ote~ w «. •. n- «u»** c C C« * t C t? tC t C * c X X X X 2 > ,o>fl>C'o#>'o>,5> i 3 * f l p r r P H r p r N M w a **■ u. u* u» •*» •*» u»

Total variation Variation in selected ige groups

15.1: Metrical data and comparisons of cranial measurements of modern wild piq sample from Germany with those from Hakel 88

Total variation Variation in stlfctttf ago groups ile 15.2: Metrical data and comparisons of postcranial aeasureaents of modern wild pig saaple froa Germany with those froa Iran 89

Toll) virution Virution in selrctcd ije groups 90 7 Mtia dt ad oprsn o cail esrmns f oen id i sml fo Drs ih hs fo Hakel from those with Darss from sample pig wild modern of measurements cranial of comparisons and data Metrical17: > * > *S > c*5 5 > * > ^ « r r r r* i-»t» r r- *-*-«* ** wu**o»i 0 £ * > p ~ * m » m «*»

»3ISllt3SHSKSSl«3V!tfS8aiSI1S83X»»StiSSSS8)ISSiS38S!SS«S33 at s??; = ? = sl!3S3??s?;liss?sssai5ssiss5is = Bss«^

?®?»?f,? ? » r r * ? * ? ? “rrr?r'rr!,P?'rr?'*?*r?r*f'*“ r'r?r*r!‘r^?:

= r? = = = = *«? = = ??=?*:?KS?£igas = ?ss?;s = sg = 3 = 5 Kfta = = csa!S3 = « • * 4K O • O O U» A •'»*■*•• *«•* 0 *0 O ^ *» m ^«OUIO0( U 1A O O O • MOM* O Ul O W) • M Ul Mt O ^ .O ? ? ? = ? - - - r = = ? = = ? - SK = xs yB « = x=:sga5figsK?siK±s55t5aBsps • V rrr«*?*r?r*rrr'“*““‘'“““ “ ■ • W W W W M UI.m P>MMM

S!crudin*B>*2!klB>*Mwui«t«eS>aeeS«e’4S 5 S a 5 S 5 e a w i*e M

5?r? = ?s:;as?Fr = ?£S???ssaaF = sa3SgsasS!SS?!S*Sg553Ks = = *-J CM W ♦ W' r* U» M «• Ki a * o * C* » I* A *+ o ■ M ■ M O W M a O M» 9* W» O• O Ul o * M O o o • o CM CM o o O ^? = = ?----= = ?; = ?- - ^ ? ^ ? = = ??S£SCaS53 5^ ? S S “|Ci2SS2 ??????»??«?®»???rrr?r“rrfP!Jrr«!arf??'f,!*“r'rr*“!'r!**f' ? s

2

fs^SKZSSjSBSjxsssszissssszzispiiSgscyiiJS j* i

sssssss^srsssssssslsssssssssss^cssssslssss^szsstf II £* 5* . §- S r* r =1 *

91

s £ s rr • 3* • rr o » # s ■ in a

a A M « rn ** M »*» I I O O I I »*» M * M»M w«l *M»M ID V A &JI A LN k j a u o W* I I ft ft I ft ft I I - ovrofi'Ov'o **> « * « **> ovrofi'Ov'o

S ^ m b D M ^ U M M O U * « w » y M AD ■■ pui V M pui ■■ AD ^liS^K>K5*StSS* mm (JO ^ (JO M aw M •• Vi A m ^ M LA U V mm tm w s I S M t ) * * w w* ♦o w* w * * m u A ^ mm lift! I I ft I lift! I mm mm *0 92

mm mm mm 3^0

3

3 Vi M •• • • ■» SI V A ^ mm mm mm •OTJ •OTJ 3 tww M * * w 6 M SI Ul Ul 6 SI SI M M Ol W — Vi•— U SI ^ Ki Vi ^ ■“ VI Vi •» V SI ■• M ■• U VI Ul Vi W VI _ “• Vi » . Ul X ac ac < < mm Ul ^ mm mm mm b mm wMMMHinwS m

-DA

» • K> •• ■» * W Vi •“ " M VI 111 sa sa N m m m M •* •• KJ KiKJ LJ u •• Ka «• M Vi Ul PsJ •* •• mm mm mm m 33S23»;:383 = iatSSS333K2::£*K£!35i&£s:at22s:223£S5S£S£S^S38:S = 33S23»;:383 ^^wiM»tf^ft»*«uM>aM«*«w^yioyiiiiaiwiw^3^yii«8»ovt"iiiiX*iii3'SSMoSSwS C C C C CA C C C CC iCC •o I I j JT flB Z X X ISW tl ft ft ftI- *0 • I MM H y % > v > co t > t 9 9 rrrPMt*ppM t v > t t co > v > % y ?:u;:.««ss;s;s.K3Szsiiss:sait!Sss£ft.ita88tt8is5s8yySs = «Mr^M*iD«Dis>kDiDiiWRM»ai^w0iAe*MaAwM3puiuiSae»to«9tAsiS»55Scr!Su mm mm mm K» K» W w **-*? w W

Totn\ vitiation Variation in sclrcted age groups able 19.1: Metrical data and coaparisons of cranial aeasureaents of modern wild pig saaple froa Turkey with those froa Hakel^

n « « i > _ , , a a i a a , , _ > ul ca u ul ca ^

M*M W«i * A 9» ^ U Ul * am O n P O ^ O N *T» •O’O « SC « SC O•O’O n P O ^ O*T» N >0- ■<»£>» 04»4»MlAUIUIUl4fti»0 I T- m 23 = s a s = 23

tj jj m

h 3= o • 1A M M * I HWH| HWH| I k M «S> o ^^ •* * w • m O *S> 4

s W X *0*0 X S *B*n ^ 93 a *> *> U O Q. a » ->

n kjm I S 7 « 4U6A O • U O • • O U O 4U6A i « o (X a u u I ______I«! a k «* ? m . . . . r r ? ^ r SSuSKSu s • i ■ U E — jJ Ul CF» 94 M m ^ gi ^ * M(A a • • i i i M « 0 » 4 M ( A * £t ?£ **i 5? U ££ O* O i »s» K» M 9« o ^ CD M ra -as.-sas- K» N» — — N» K» ( r r V r ^ r * ? * 1 1 * ^ * I Of I I I Q . ' -r-r -r-r S ’-? _ TJ X *OtS H « , P P a i i ••uu»Muo>V ^ w • w v -«>c'o*>'o>-o>-o»-oc-c'c-r^r -«>c'o*>'o>-o>-o»-oc-c'c-r^r z W N» W O N» U l * A ?,,‘: ? ? “ ?:?5r35?riSlp5S:2!Str|j!S«,g583IS!5532J!SfiSaC?!,!,:‘i:? 33 N 2VA 40 13.1 - 16.4 15.0 1.0 l.l 20 14.1-16.3 15.0 0.1 3.9 19 14.3-20.4 13.3 1.4 3.2 H 2 VP 31 14.3 - 17.0 13.9 0.7 4.4 19 14.9-17.0 13.9 0.7 4.4 19 14.2 20.4 16.3 1.3 4.3 MjWA 22 16.2 - 20.0 18.2 0.8 4.3 8 16.2-19.3 17.9 0.9 3.0 14 17.3-20.0 18.3 0.7 3.8 Table 19.2: Metrical data and comparisons of postcranial measurements of modern wild pig sample' from Turkey with those from Ir 94

Total variation Variation in selected age groups 3 II 3 I TJT: 33I33TJrjT3 a & to I ►- Kf I W MigMK •Da * u/ kj nuw* « U2 2 2 'OTJ X I 3: T3 T3 I t a I | I Q, •-w ' ' o C C < C C* C C CCCCCt t CunM* » m m ** * UT3 W ZX ’OT) t_k •-»*-». ^ i • a a i tj f f s N ^ O v z > > *o > c •o o* > *o > *o > w n r c - c ^ - r r r * * - t-w * * ««,X* * *o eoCAO > 0 ~ * M *M WVI

95 able 20.2: Metrical data and comparisons of postcranial measurements of modern wild pig sample from Israel with those from Iran 96

Total variation Variation in selected age groups 21.1: Metrical data and comparisons of cranial measurements of modern wild pig sample from Iraq with those from Hakel 97

yjriition Variation in selected ege groups Table 21.2: Metrical data and comparisons of postcranial measurements of modern wild pig sample from Iraq with those fro Iran 98

loU\ vanillin Variation in stlfdfd agt groups 22: Metrical data and coaparisons of cranial aeasureaents of modern wild pig sample' froa Iran with those froa Halel * _ * «, m ?s a;i5 — M s s ? M — •» _ £ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ M ^ ^ ^ C 0 yg m m yg ^41 CM CM •O

mm iiiv, =L. f M W U IU *M w» * Ul fop M m M p 2 p ^ • p p “ “ - r r p - • “ ^ “ p 5 3 ),^ 5 SsS5S;Nggj;3S.5= - - . . g )ii

r-r* p p

r p w •• ^ pi v >i»a«uiuiuiut*o*4o o o • w ui ui w • o o v >i»a«uiuiuiut*o*4o pi ^ •• w .A ® L L is’i’fiiiii * 4 ■*w*»M«waM«M«*wo*>u*u*u«0»•U u • w a«*»w »uu««»«^^ SS..5C:rS*.-^55SS«S5iS^^SSN555^X*5;a*5S5S5^»3t3 pp pp pp r FF F? ? ? ? ? ? ? F F 5 «M«aa*UM»Na**i«wwBuiwuiwa»uiui«***n«t*»»u*«««»*»uuo «• YI s H Vs s jsSHSSSsKsHSgsKsSssSssajsSSKKftSKicsHaSSssSSSafts^ssSifiS “ ? jsSHSSSsKsHSgsKsSssSssajsSSKKftSKicsHaSSssSSSafts^ssSifiS -~«..!3Srr;:;;:^«(v; s 3 s , 5 « = rS = FSr-????r???aa#FS£a»? = a«s5»tf« = iit = £ii = 2535 = = 2535 = £ii = iit = a«s5»tf« FSr-????r???aa#FS£a»? = = rS = « W ® •• • • • ^ ^ •• ^ •• ^ *# S S V M M A M 5;5 “ * * t * • pFp£FpppF?p??FFppFFprapF?FppFp?F?pF**5*iKCS2S35:£ = s ^^“crrrmsrs-rsiirsrsrSrrsissrsinssrrrcssssrSSssrrsSsrr:” U» f •» *0s»*UI«*piytOUI"K*WOV«O'4AW»«O« u ^ M M W W M M ^ u *0s»*UI«*piytOUI"K*WOV«O'4AW»«O« f•» U» w # VI O 5 pppprpppppppppi-rprFppppprp p p p p r » 5 r, of* *« w r r w *« of* • S ? ?: S. -. 8 = 35? = = -8g = ?SS??:S.-.8-8g = a 3 = t S35? 5= ; ^= 85*sssas?i t ? ?3?3 ? ’l’1,“ ?S^S==o-^S=3=S=?-ia??rascss t ? rtsaaSI ? 7 ,ll?" 7 ,l,? T " “ ? " t *???? “ “ TffTf'-* .«.«• ••••Uo. F^FFppp.-pppFFFFpppFFF^ppFppprpFppppJsSafaisSSaaJflaSI ro??»??»r BlBxA-oMMwAKtxisinxAAvuBA^MMwvMauiviunuwAin^oaNM^akiaMviu* • i r ? r ? f f ? ! Jrr»»r*rr?r*'rf*,^rr»r?'fr*“ »«• ‘'*“ .''*»-“ »' * * w »tOa»^<«w~*>i*i***wA»uiueuiUMt«i*MA w •• '. ® ^ > ^ ,. F-rFFF-uFFFFFFFSFFFFFF?*??? r ® «»••• p p r* ^ ^ ?"«“* r = *5 =

total variation Variation i* sflorlri agt groups 23: Metrical data and comparisons of cranial measurements of modern wild pig sample from India with those froa Hakel 100

Total variation Variation in selected ige groups cctc c - c c c c c'ifc’c c CuT*J*»-* *>" i •bis i i •o *o > ^ > co » > > tj > » ir * J“•OX ” * ► k> w

s- i s " s „ „ I * ! t : a?j 2 «.

l i£ is S -

u u n

-‘55 p p p u< o * 2 u< r p r Ul Ul v v v *? u o ui • • o ui o u ipi * M » M QsfJi*®''B l#TJ 3> X | m e vi m n) Buj^sp’g. o o v« o o • ui e o * * o e • oui o v« o o © © e o ui o ' w * o o ~ •— » » •— ~ n i » i " • *- o o » IO.I l I O. IO.I O. l I I ^ Q. b I I __ — I pafe!apppsp = ppip55g?pp5s = pafe!apppsp wu

102 M « » u *»-'« u 5> *LM P5> r S< ~ r PP? A *K) A N) M « p p 7 ? T p p p p > •— * •— ui DT) I I •” m o m w o = ?"“ = = = 3"“?? = »P-!5?*r = = 5«* = = 5«* = = »P-!5?*r = 3"“?? = = = ?"“ = TJT5 2 I I T ! ■n I ^ * • u» = = p = s = = = = sa*s = as?p3S3S*£Ssss?52 = sa*s = = = = s = p = = p r P P H P r r n

w n :-is ( * U J 3 3 •^ — r»o p p r p p r p p p p p p p m ^ m

o » m n = ? = ? = = = -*»? = = = ? = ? = • ui u »g »g u r>os/*»Jo~M r«aaui**M M uioeLRuioo'Uio*uiui' * o o e • o o w u o > m n e •• •• e p p p r p p r rp p p p p a * * * X X 2X 2 aT] * 2* X 2 BBu*Baa*>S<*ul*ii«Bi*oSv!wlaoB«ii«Be!!BooSaS«!5«Sa3Bo5««U M *4«i«**«K p^M M ue^^oi*^w iM U ie»a^v« u» ■ FPPPFs^^pppppppppFpppppppppppFpppppPppppFppppFr pppr-PTrp-pprPTPr*r,Tp?pPfr-ppppppp»-p«»pppppfp®pppp ppx = s--rpp?pxpp-s?i = p = |sppp = = |sppp = p s--rpp?pxpp-s?i = = ppx apppPp^^^rJrf=?= = ?i:???FS?y???"r??i«?Sr;*5ri's“ ?3 5?«~?5!£ ?i:???FS?y???"r??i«?Sr;*5ri's“ ?3 = apppPp^^^rJrf=?= ■ 5;3 = w2--«S;S3aK---53SSS-5 = :S--S = ‘» = » = -«5iS:SSaa5SSS.-St; * -«5iS:SSaa5SSS.-St; = » = ‘» = :S--S = w2--«S;S3aK---53SSS-5 = 5;3 ;.-rppspppp!.ssppsaKpxp3!sys5ftps5!5papr5pKpsK5s = = pps apppppp^pspppxpspapppspppppassippssaMaasgsssasppb ?pps---« = p? ======p? = ?pps---« ppps^-^ppppPFF^sppppspppFSJesRSpssapppassSgspaSp rwu.r r««,^.ui*u.rir«.«^«pru-r » r;.r.uu«««r.rrS:5!|Suii,r.:« ;*; „ sppppsp^a^FFPP5p?PFPssp? = riS2pf2Sssaa|ii5!:s£r5iis:55 sppppsp^a^FFPP5p?PFPssp? •U»>*M = aM C IlM ^*«O M M V«O O M «*«^M U lO M IM U I*0009U UIU»U IU «*M e**U IU (U IO = ??- = -Br^;? = ? = = .£KFx?ip;szx;s^r;ti;oar2fi5S = s^Sfi5s.£KFx?ip;szx;s^r;ti;oar2fi5S = = = ? = -Br^;? = ??- = > * ► 5 > C T3 * > T > D >Q k V r c C C* C C CCC «TCC. ar l ? * -OkT w IoUI VMutiM Virlotion in t'l'dtd ogt groups Metrical data and coaparison of cranial aeasureaents of aodern wild pig saaple fro* Sumatra with those froa Hakel

3 2 wwi« V X 0 I a . O. , s | *!kiu*SS w ,1 2 I - * . - * SSuiSMS 5 e * S X .t* *0« 2 1 X l*

2 *>* «* «*•*>* «* nu>X^>D- w«n - » 3 e 1 1 1 3 ^ w 4 -»- h 103 »go« W k - * , u I ^ 2 3 = WK^ps=iSS?i?Si5S8XSgsaaSji®}-5- = wuMOAo»ww^uwwow»«MO»»i»uwuiuiijie *s ''>einw«B 1 BUaJSlI'Ofl'O ft _ ft ftM is) I HN Hi Hi HN BUaJSlI'Ofl'O I -o is) _ ftM ft ft W* fj | MU | H* = > * H i I 5C ■on * iD^«MuS«SSoorlSSao 2 4 * C* C * C C C CC «fc C C «u»w >- » * w 2 «■ *«■ j I x J J x I j > 5 > *5 >c o5►S *5 5> > 5 rr» r rrrr*- *o * S S r ::? r “ :-“ P P r ? ? r 'C S K ? « : WMi»«*M» S*SM I?” ”

Total vuutiM VirutKMi in ttlicWtf agt ]roupt a K3 *0 \«o*» 0,0, o> ft o> ft. 0.0. X *ow*OKi xZ'B'O *o *-H n> cj satszz f o z z z z z u t j 'o M w i I o kl M M Hk, V * * W M M w M* * *< IXSDBXXX'JB ^ i r , wrft i I Ck O I CCCCC* C CCCCCCCK c •0 *0*0 ^ X > ’0 > 1 1 > c l0 •» > •*» > U ISIS ^ wrNrV rtr“rMrH ^ * * * 1 ^ ■o e >* i n I i 1111 111 i n i i i I n i m i i i 11 i 111 i m i j 1111 m m 11

^ ■ w

-D

104 4.2: Log ratio diagrais coaparing the cranial aean aeasureaents of aodern pig saiples froa Hakel with those froa other areas. • Single aeasureaents — sampl e s i z e ^ b

Hungary Poland Czechoslovakia Austria Ponama Turkey | rJjj j rin n “l

Z I l l « m iii „i a. i i iii ,| a (7»7*1 WWt*w.Mr *tit „» > iifs=L £3

&Z 5 S 5 S S V V Z Z Z Z Z ^ Q ^ ■»*» ■»*» I I I I I I 11 I 11 H I I I I 4 I 4 I I 14 4 I f I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 1I I I 5 5 5 S K *

Log ratio » ff » a

73 *0 i p aodern of aeasureaents aean cranial the coiparing diagraas ratio Log 4.3: a a a a a v t» *- X TIM SHI M T9 MH VI XXZSS tu SSSSSBB'O a a a M I »- M ►* I M Ul | | O u li M * W W KJ M H ^ ^ *■* 2 Z X T9T9 ZZZVD i i a i i i a i i a a i 5SS€S*c5i S555S5£5 Un M n cM ’C-^-nnp'^-^-* * W M M * w X *0^ X X TIT9 T9 T) T9 T9 X n a * M » M *•*<* | | | I I I II I I II I I I I I I I I I I I I I I | I I | | | | ( I | | | 1 | | 1 I I | I I I sal ni Cia ct Siberia fcst China India Israel ape fo Hkl ih those with Hakel froa saaples 3

w A J V Z1_

o iue : o rto igas oprn te otrna aa aaueet o ldr snls ra rn ih hs fo ohr areas other froa those with Iran froa sanples lodern of aeasureaents aean postcranial the comparing diagraas ratio Log 5: Figure

o

107 2. Discussion

As seen throughout this chapter, there is a range of variation in size among the samples of Sus scrofa ( 104-107 ). However, it is possible to group some of these populations together on the basis of the size variation. Tab\e &n

- Turkey+Iran+Iraq

- Austr ia+Germany+Nether lands+France

- Poland+Czechoslovak ia+Hungary+Romania

- Italy+Spain

Each group and the remaining single populations from Ziguinchor,

Tunisia, Israel, India, West Siberia, China and Sumatra were compared using the standards established on the first group

(Turkey+Iran+Iraq).

The combined populations from Turkey, Iran and Iraq show homogeneity (coefficients of variation vary between 3.5-6.9 in tooth widths and 4.6-10.2 ' in postcranial measurements) even though the first two populations are classified as Sus scrofa lvbicus and the third as Sus scrofa attila by Groves (1981),

(.p

The wild pigs from Austria, Germany, the Netherlands and France which all belong to Sus scrofa scrofa (Groves, 1981) are also grouped together (see paic^es 115^117^ 119 ). The coefficients of

108 variation of the sample vary between 4.2-8.2 . for tooth widths

and 4.0 -11.7 for postcranials. The southern version of this

group (the ones from France) is smaller ( see p^S- 99 and 104 )

while the north eastern European version (the ones from Austria)

is larger ( p^s-■ - 32, 105 Sund 117 ) than the Hakel pigs. This

might perhaps be explained by the shortage or abundance of the

food sources which are available to them in the econiches that

they inhabit. However, the differences seem to be relatively

minor. They are thus not considered to be different subspecies

but are simply slightly smaller and larger versions of Sus

s c r o f a s c r o t a . ,

Coefficients of variation of the next group (Italy+Spain) are

larger (4.3-12.9 in tooth widths). Most of the specimens from

Italian material came from Sardinia and the Spanish ones from

Andalusia (see pg. 73). Specimens which came from Sardinia and

Andalusia are considered as they belong to the subspecies of Sus

scrofa meridionalis. However, among the Sardinian specimens,

there are a few specimens from central Italy which are considered

as they belong to Sus scrofa scrofa (Groves, 1981). The

relatively higher coefficients of variation in this group might

be explained by the integration of a few specimens from central

Italy (pgS. 115, 117, 120).

The last group consists of the specimens from Poland+

Czechoslovakia+Hungary+Romania ( see p^s. 115, 117 amd 120 ).

According to Groves, the specimens from Poland and Czechoslovakia

109 belong to the subspecies of Sus scrofa scrofa and the ones from

Hungary and Romania to Sus scrofa attila. (Groves, 1981). Our specimens showed that they are more or less the same size. The coefficients of variation vary between 3.9 and 7.2 for this g r o u p .

The comparison of each group and the remaining single populations analysed in this chapter with the group from Turkey,Iran and Iraq gives the following results:

The nature of the size variation, in most cases, is geographical except in one sample which is the one from Ziguinchor. In the case of the Ziguinchor pigs , which are the smallest of all,

(18-26% smaller than the control group) human interference is the reason, and they are in fact primitive domestic animals.

The Tunisian population falls into the category of Sus scrofa aloira (Groves, 1981) and they are 9-13 % smaller than our control group. The t tests show significance at 0.01 level for a l l m e a s u r e m e n t s (p<^. 1 1 5 ) .

The pigs from Italy and Spain are members of the Sus scrofa tier idionalis group. The animals of this group are

8-19% smaller. than the ones from Turkey, Iran and Iraq.

Significance level is 0.01 ( p<^s. 115, 117 a.r\d 120 )- There are

a few alternative explanations of their being similar to each

other in their small size: a) they are feral domesticates, b)they

nay represent independent adaptation to similar habitats, c) they

night have been widespread over southwestern Europe once, but

110 they became isolated in different pockets because of some environmental changes (Groves, 1981).The first explanation is more widely accepted, particularly for the Sardinian population.

The absence of a wild ancestor for the pigs indicates that these animals must have been introduced from the mainland by humans intentionally or inadvertantly during the Early Neolithic (ca.

5000 BC), soon after humans occupied the island (Keller, 1899,

Wigne, 1987).

The specimens from Austria, Germany, the Netherlands and France are also smaller than the Turkish, Iranian and Iraqi pigs (1-7%), and the differences seem to be significant (p^s- 115,117, 119).

The specimens from Poland, Czechoslovakia, Hungary and Romania are a little larger than our control group (2-7%) but differences do not seem to be highly significant (p<^s. 115, 117, 120).

Pigs from Israel are also smaller when compared with the animals from Turkey, Iran and Iraq (1-7% in toth widths and 3-13% in postcranials. However they are all considered as they belong to the same subspecies, Sus scrofa lvbicus (Groves, 1981).

Parametric t tests show significance at the 0.01 level for most of the measurements (p^.116).

The subspecies of Sus scrofa cristatus of India also seems to be smaller than our control group (3-7%). Parametric t tests show significant differences at the 0.01 and 0.05 levels for some

111 measurements ( p^ll6).,

The next population from Siberia is classified as Sus scrofa

sibiricus which is described as being in size a fairly small Sus scrofa by Groves (1981). Our small sample does not show much difference to the control group.

Comparison of Chinese pigs with the pigs from Turkey, Iran and

Iraq shows that the Chinese pigs, which belong to the subspecies

Sus scrofa moupinensis. are slightly smaller than their middle-

eastern counterparts ( 116)-

The last population in our sequence is from Sumatra. These animals are considered to belong to the subspecies Sus scrofa vittatus. According to Groves there is an enormous range of variation in size among geographical samples of this subspecies.

Groves says that within Sumatra the two respectable samples from

two different location are very different in size (Groves,

1981). Our sample shows that they are significantly smaller than

the wild pigs from Turkey, Iran and Iraq (7-14%). Parametric t tests show significance at the 0.01 level for all measurements

except for P4 which is, in fact 1% larger ( see p ^ - 1 1 6 ). T h i s might well be an indication of some regional genetic differences.

In order to evaluate any variation in shape, the "size" and

"shape" statistic of Penrose (1954) was used. Some cranial and dental measurements were compared together. Standard deviation units (see pg.22-23) were calculated using the Hakel sample and

this population was compared to the others. Page 121 g i v e s t h e

112 basic information used and Figure 6 the relationships of "size" and "shape” . The results of these analysis are as follows:

By this method, there is further evidence of a clear size variation in some populations and it clearly separates the small­ sized populations [Ziguinchor (2), Italy (5), Spain (4)] from the large-sized group [Poland+ Czechoslovakia+ Hungary+Romania (11)].

Populations from Tunisia (3) and Sumatra (19) also diverge from the Hakel population. They are smaller than the Hakel pigs. Small differences between central European populations are negligible.

Middle Eastern populations [Turkey (12), Iran (13), Iraq (14)] are larger than the rest of the groups except group 11

(Poland+Czechoslovak ia+Hungary+Romania).

Shape variation is not well marked, unlike size variation, although some groups diverge from the Hakel position. Shape differences especially separate group 2 (Ziguinchor) from group

11 (Poland+Czechoslovakia+Hungary+Romania) and group 17 (west

S i b e r i a ).

As a result, we might suggest that there is a range of variation

in size and shape among the samples of this species. In some cases differences are minor, in other cases they are considerable. Body proportions, within limits, are readily changed by diet. For instance, experiments show that domestic

pigs can remain healthy and fertile on a diet which stunts their growth (Hammond, 1965). If the same applies to wild pigs the

crowding and sub-optimal diet could have effects on the size of

# ciomesVvc

113 the animals. In some habitats where environments may be unusual or sub-optimal and the animals may have the opportunity to range over more varied habitat, non genetic effects may occur as it is the case between southern and northern versions of Sus scrofa scrofa and Sus scrofa lybicus (see pgs. 109 and 111). Among the samples analysed in this chapter, the differences within the groups are relatively minor and may reasonably be explained by the differences in the habitats that they inhabited. However, the differences between the groups are significant enough to accept them as belonging to different subspecies. al 2. : oprsn f oe eetd esrmns n obnd id i samples pig wild combined in measurements selected some of Comparison : 27.1 Table

» a - “ 3 ;ar

: ; ► s " 5

s i n ^ •

115 72 Cmaio o sm slce maueet i cmie wl pg samples pig wild combined in measurements selected some of Comparison : 27.2

116 14.0

».»

13.0

* /

12.0,.

11.0

10.0

8.0 S.O 10.0 11.0 12.0 NjUA

F i g i r e 6 : Size variation of M^W of various subspecies of Sus scrofa. The lines enclose the individual specimens. N r 1 . Z i g u i n c h o r 1 6 2 . T u n i s i a 5 3 . Italy+Spain 2 7 4 . Germany+France+ Netherlands+Austria 3 7 8 5 . Poland+ Czechoslovakia+ Hungary+Romania 7 6 . Turkey+Iran+Iraq 6 5 7 . I s r a e l 1 0 2 8 . I n d i a 1 3 9 . West Siberia 3 1 0 . C h i n a 2 3 1 1 . S u m a t r a 8 0

117 dp*wa n w A

H "A

MWWA

M-.WA

Huaerus

Radius Bfd

Pelvis LAR

Astragalus

1 I l Log Ratio • C.3 ♦ 0.-3

Figure 7 ; loq ratio histograas, leans and standard deviations illustrating variation in soie selected ■easureients in combined vild pig group troa Turkey+iran+iraq

118 -aa

M 10

i\ ~ r t r r r

N10

cr> in «^ mo o z IV— -Ul ro no

CU B in S3 ID A* UlQ . ft#IA AS »^ <=«i tf) - ID U1 «-** ro 3 - * = j O - ft iA a*2

» Jt. 3 ©

119 mo

tn a «• *T3B* |/| **- tf)

#D U) n ■ s & aIA a#" 5Ja inc a i in roa ^a

o « c noVI

a a ■D TJ

ro o *1 0

C*> in n in ro O ©

tu in -*

3 o

120 Measurements fcrouos

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 10 19

5 6.85 4.55 7.08 6.20 6.0C 7.28 6.76 5.34 6.80 7.16 11.06 7.48 7.30 7.97 7.3C 7.12 6.95 6.45 5.95 21.05 16.50 20.22 18.77 18.18 20.96 21.03 21.28 21.54 21.77 23.16 22.73 22.69 22.B8 22.07 21.01 20.07 21.66 18.92 iA m a 24.50 20.16 23.00 23.00 21.83 25.16 24.50 24.00 24.66 25.83 26.83 25.00 25.16 25.16 24.16 23.50 26.16 25.33 23.16 H^A 23.00 18.00 21.12 21.75 20.00 23.50 22.75 22.87 23.12 24.50 24.75 24.12 24.62 24.50 23.75 23.00 24.50 24.12 22.12 20.50 15.80 19.65 13.16 17.64 19.50 20.73 19.22 21.31 21.57 22.62 21.63 22.20 22.05 21.54 20.93 21.12 21.30 20.11

Distances of the Hakel pigs froa tne rest (in soie uooer jaw and teeth aeasureaentsi

1-2 1-3 1-4 1-5 1-6 1-7 1-8 1-9 1-10 l-ll 1-12 1-13 1-14 1-15 1-16 1-17 1-18 1-19

Size 17.45 0.91 1.97 6.00 -0.01 0.00 0.26 -0.09 -0.97 -6.27 -1.03 -1.47 -1.77 -0.34 0.00 -0.33 -0.35 0.84 Shape 0.93 0.52 0.27 0.64 -0.36 0.02 0.29 -0.09 -0.18 -0.75 -0.17 -0.29 -0.16 -0.25 0.25 -0.94 .0.27 0.62

Table 28: Soae cranial aeasureaents, expressed in standard deviation units and eaployed in the Penrose 'size and shape' analysis/ coapannq the aodern wild pig saaole froa Hakel in relation to the rest. For brevity, these saaoles were assigned the nuaoers 1-19, as follows: 1. Hakel: 2. Ziauinenor; 3. Tunisia: 4. Soain: 5. Italy; 6. Netherlands; 7. 6eraanv; 8. Schleswig Holstein; 9. Darss; 10. Austria; 11. PolandtCzechosiovakiarHungary+Roaama; 12. Turkey; 13. Iran; 14. Iraq; 15. Israel; 16. India; 17. H . Siberia; 18. China: 19. S u a a t r a

size

Fjure 11: Size and shape distances of various aooern pig samp\as from the Hakel pigs. Saaple figures are defined in Table 28

121 CHAPTER VI

ZOOARCHAEOLOGICAL APPLICATIONS (Appendix: Pages 347-454)

To separate larger wild from smaller domestic animals, or to investigate size changes between different periods, suitable measurements should ideally show low variability. The contribution of the variation discussed in Chapters IV and V must be considered while using and interpreting the different measurements taken on samples of pig bones from archaeological contexts. All the measurements taken were analysed in this research but the interpretation was made on the basis of the most reliable measurements, as was the case in the previous chapter

(see pg 71). Namely, mainly tooth widths, humerus HCT, radius

BpP, ulna LPA, pelvis LAR, tibia Bfd and astragalus LA.

Archaeological examples

In the following examples, values for different measurements are compared by means of common standards based on measurements of the Hakel sample (for cranial) and Iranian wild pigs (for postcranials) using the log. ratio method (see pgs. 20, 21). Pig samples from archaeological sites were also compared with the modern samples from the same countries (pgs. 166-176).

The following regional examples are concerned with the degree of separation of wild and early domestic pigs. Some of these examples have been studied previously by various scientists. It was not always possible to find the same specimens published by

122 previous investigators, and this was partly because material was removed for analysis and then not returned, and partly because of collection reorganization. However, some specimens which were not included in previous publications were fortunately found and analysed.

1. Turkey

1. 1. Erbaba/Suberde: (Appendix -.Pauses "547-S51, 4 2 0

Unfortunately the material from these two sites had to be treated as a single group as it was all mixed up when recovered from Dexter Perkin's house. The material was removed to Cambridge

Massachusetts, but it could not be sorted out in the absence of proper documentation for the collection. However, a large part of the sample is from Erbaba (personal communication with Meadow,

May, 1990).

The two sites are located some kilometers apart in the central

Anatolian plateau and were excavated by Bordaz (1973). The general environments around the two sites are extremely similar

(Perkins and Daly, 1968). C14 dates for Suberde are between 6520-

5584 BC (Bordaz, 1973). There are no C14 dates for Erbaba, but the site is dated to ca. 5500-5300 BC on the basis of archaeological remains (Daly, 1970). Both sites are small, but

Erlbaba is more developed than Suberde with its architecture and several types of pottery which do not exist in Suberde. Daly suggests that there is no evidence for the domestication of animals in Suberde while in Erbaba the main food animals are

123 probably domestic. Following table gives the measurements data of the material. The distributions of measurements are presented in

Append IX (p* A13V

MttiurtMnta M R M so CV M c i i u r m n t t N R M SD CV (n-1) (n-1) dp31 25 12.2 - 15.3 14.0 0.7 5.0 Scapula CLp 11 39.0 . 49.0 43.8 3.7 8.4 dp4l 32 14.0 - 16.5 15.3 0.7 4.5 SLC 15 24.0 - 35.0 29.2 3.2 10.9 24 15.6 - 20.7 18.7 1.2 6.4 BC 12 27.0 - 34.0 30.0 2.5 8.3 MML2L 4.7 SBC 13 - 25.4 23.2 1.1 X 11.0 16.0 17 I 9 U 13.4 1.7 « 20.8 - 9 12.6 M3L 3 36.4 - 37.6 37.2 0.7 1.8 Bd 7 48 0 - 58.0 52.9 4 . 3 8.1 dp4l 12 18.7 - 23.5 21.1 1.4 6.6 BT 9 35.5 - 44.5 38.9 2.9 7.4 P4L 13 14.8 - 17.6 16.3 0.8 4.9 HCT 13 22.5 - 27.0 29.3 1.5 6.1 MjL 16 16.9 - 20.7 19.3 1.1 5.6 Radius BpP 7 35.0 - 42.5 39.9 2.7 6.7 M?L 14 23.2 - 27.1 24.3 1.2 4.9 Dp 7 24.5 - 29.5 27.6 1.8 6.5 m 3l 5 41.5 - 46.2 43.7 1.9 4.3 Ulna DPA 4 42.0 - 46.5 43.6 2.0 4.5 dp3wp 28 8.6 - 10.3 9.7 0.4 4.1 LPA 5 31.0 - 35.0 33.2 2.0 6.0 dp4va 32 11.1 - 13.2 12.5 0.6 4.8 BPC 8 26.0 - 35.5 28.1 3.3 11.7 dp4wp 33 11.4 - 13.6 12.7 0.6 4.7 MC III Bp 3 18.5 - 22.5 20.0 2.2 11.0 M*VA 21 14.0 - 16.3 15.1 0.8 5.2 MC IV Bp 2 23.5 - 26.0 24.8 1.8 7.2 MfwP 25 14.5 - 16.6 15.5 0.7 4.5 Tibia BdP 8 34.5 - 43.0 38.1 2.6 6.9 M*VA 17 17.0 - 20.1 19.1 0.7 3.6 Bfd 7 27.0 - 31.0 28.9 1.4 4.8 M‘VP 14 17.8 - 20.6 19.0 0.7 3.6 Dd 8 31.0 - 37.5 33.4 2.2 6.5 h 3wa 10 20.7 - 24.0 22.0 1.0 4.5 Astragalus CL1 24 46.5 - 57.5 51.8 2.5 4.8 dp4va 17 7.0 - 8.5 7.5 0.4 4.3 GLm 24 41.5 - 51.5 46.3 2.4 5.1 dp4wp 17 9.1 - 10.3 9.5 0.4 4.2 Bd 24 29.5 - 36.0 32.5 1.6 4.9 P4W 16 9.5 - 11.0 10.2 0.4 3.9 LA 25 38.0 - 45.5 42.3 2.2 5.2 Calcanaum MjWA 18 10.5 - 13.3 11.4 0.7 6.1 CO 9 36.5 - 40.0 38.1 1 .6 4 .1 MjWP 19 11.4 - 13.5 12. 4 0.6 4.8 1 10 33.0 - 37.5 34.9 1.3 3.7 MjVA 17 14.7 - 16.8 15.6 0.7 4.4 2 15 14.0 - 19.0 15.6 1 . 4 8 . 9 MjtfP 13 14.8 - 17.8 15.8 0.9 5.6 MT III Bp 1 20.0 MjWA 12 17.0 - 19.6 18.4 0.8 4.3 V 29 : Metrical data from Erbaba/Suberde

The variation in reliable measurements is not so large that it

could not be found within a single population. The coefficients

3f variation are not all that high either, 3.6 -6.1 for tooth

widths and 4.8 -6.8 for postcranials. 16 6 and \ll' show

:he comparison of Erbaba and Suberde pig bones with those of the

nodern Turkish wild pigs. Here again measurements of Erbaba and

Suberde pigs do not seem to be particularly smaller than those of

their modern wild counterparts. We might therefore conclude that

:here is no evidence of domestication at these sites.

L. 2. Cayonii: [Appendix: Pa^es 3 5 2 - 16 6 ; ^ 2 9 ^ 3 0)

Cayonii lies 7 km. southwest of the town of Ergani, Diyarbakir in

southeastern Anatolia. It is situated on the northern bank of the

124 Bogazgay, a small tributary stream of the Tigris river. The site

has been excavated by a joint team of Istanbul, Chicago and

Karlsruhe Universities. There are three main phases of occupation at the site:

Phase I - The main Prepottery Neolithic settlement composed of

5 subphases and various architectural layers.

Phase II - Pottery Neolithic settlement. Mainly Pre-Halafian,

Late Chalcolithic and Early Bronze Age I.

Phase III - Early Bronze Age II, III and Iron Age. During this

phase Cayonii seems to have been used as a burial

ground. As no habitation layers were recovered, the

excavators think that the EBA II and III settlement

is somewhere in the vicinity (Ozdogan M. and Ozdogan

A., l'32'O.

The suggested date for the PPN levels at the site is 7250-6750 BC

(Braidwood, 1986).

All the faunal material analysed by Reed, Lawrence and currently

myself come from Phase I. Stampfli measured some pig bones from

this phase and suggested that the pigs from Qayonii were

domesticated (Lawrence 1980;

The distributions of measurements for pig bones from Cayonii are

shown in Appendix 42-% . As it is seen in the figures

none of the measurements indicate any clear bimodality. Table 3G

shows that the coefficients of variation vary between 4.0-8.6 in

tooth widths and 6 .6-8.7 for postcranial measurements, 12LV

125 Heiiarutnti 3D CV N R H SO CV (n-1) (n-1) ij-dpj 2 32.5 - 50.5 41.5 12.7 30 Scapula GLp 57 32.5 _ 53.0 43.6 I3/I3-P2 4 73.0 - 76.0 73.9 2.3 4.7 10.7 SLC 53 21.5 - 34.5 27.3 6 62.0 - 78.0 71.3 6.7 4.2 5.3 Jl-4 BO 39 22.0 - 35.5 29.2 2 155.0 - 165.0 160.0 7.1 3.9 13.3 SBC 34 9.5 - 17.5 13.2 4 2 219.0 - 233.0 226.0 9.9 3.2 24.2 HUMtUI Bd 76 33.5 - 59.0 48.9 12 7 49.5 - 113.5 86.6 21.9 4.7 9.6 2 BT 75 31.0 - 41.5 36.7 16b 2 47.0 - 54.0 50.5 4.9 3.2 8.7 HCT 88 20.0 - 26.0 23.1 1.7 A 3 27.5 - 36.0 31.2 4.4 7.3 Radius BpP 66 31.5 - 41.5 36.1 2 48.5 - 50.5 49.5 1.4 2.8 7.7 Pl-dp4 Op 60 20.0 - dp2-dp4 2 38.5 - 41.0 39.8 1.8 31.5 24.6 5.2 20.9 Bd 12 38.5 - 47.0 44.3 9 40.5 - 47.0 43.3 2.3 2.8 6.3 t*2“P4 Bid 9 35.0 - 40.5 37.2 4 76.0 - 82.0 79.5 2.6 2.4 6.4 Ulna OPA 55 29.5 - 55.5 42.2 41 12.6 - 15.5 14.0 0.6 6.7 15.8 "£!i SDO 6 29.0 - 44.5 36.9 63 13.0 - 16.4 14.9 1.4 13.5 LO 6 48.0 - 64.0 67.1 91 16.0 - 20.4 18.3 1.1 13.0 19.3 aS|i LPA 78 25.5 - 38.5 30.7 2.7 8.7 n 2l 25 21.5 - 26.0 23.2 1.0 BPC 98 18.5 - 33.0 24.6 3.1 m 3l 14 31.5 - 41.5 36.8 2.7 12.5 HC III BP 21 16.5 - 24.5 20.3 2.9 dP4l 20 19.4 - 23.4 21.4 1.0 14.2 MC IV Bp 32 16.0 - 25.0 18.6 p 4l 19 15.0 - 17.0 16.0 0.6 2.5 13.4 Pelvis LAR 29 27.5 - 39.5 34.5 Hjt 63 15.6 - 20.4 18.3 1.2 2.6 7.5 OA 2 36.1 - 42.5 40.3 Hjt 40 21.4 - 26.2 23.5 1.3 3.1 7.6 F e m e DCP 9 25.5 - 39.5 32.1 H3L 30 34.6 - 49.4 40.9 3.4 3.7 11.5 Bp 3 60.5 - 85.0 73.7 dplup 41 8.5 - 10.5 9.3 0.5 12.4 16.8 Bd 12 44.5 - 61.0 55.8 dp4m 56 11.3 - 13.3 12.4 0.5 5.3 9.4 BT 6 23.5 - 29.0 26.5 dp4wp 67 11.2 - 13.8 12.3 0.6 2.1 7.9 Tibia Bp 7 50.0 - 66.5 57.1 5.7 hHta 69 13.3 - 16.2 14.9 0.7 9.9 BdP 74 30.0 - 40.5 36.0 mzvp 79 13.4 - 16.5 15.1 0.7 2.4 6.6 Bfd 64 24.5 - 32.0 28.0 1.6 5.7 m2wa 24 16.2 - 20.7 18.6 1.1 Dd 66 25.5 - 40.0 32.0 2.7 8.4 m 2v p 27 15.8 - 20.5 18.5 1.3 Astragalus GL1 127 39.0 - 57.5 49.1 3.7 h3va 16 20.2 - 22.6 21.4 0.9 7.5 OLe 117 35.0 - 50.5 43.8 dp4w« 34 6.6 - 6.0 7.3 0.3 3.2 7.3 Bd 108 24.0 - dp4wp 32 8.9 - 10.4 9.6 0.4 39.5 29.4 2.8 9.5 LA 122 34.0 - 47.0 40.6 2.7 6.6 P»w 22 8.9 - 11.5 10.3 0.6 Calcaneus CL 14 90.0 - 150.5 111.6 22.9 20.5 HjVA 62 10.0 - 12.6 11.3 0.6 CO 57 29.0 - 41.0 35.2 2.5 7.1 MjWP 65 10.6 - 13.4 12.2 0.6 1 59 28.0 - 37.0 32.9 2.1 6.3 MjVA 41 14.0 - 17.0 15.5 1.0 2 78 12.5 - 17.5 14.7 1.2 8.1 HjVP 42 13.0 - 17.9 16 .0 1.1 MT III Bp 19 13.5 - 33.0 21.4 3.9 18.2 MjWA 36 16.2 - 21.8 18.7 1.6 MT IV Bp 12 14.0 - 20.0 18.1 2.0 11.0

Table 30 : Metrical data from Cayonii

Figures 12.\.yl'i.\ (pgs.compare the measurements of Cayonii pigs

with those of the modern Turkish wild pigs. As seen in the

figures, certain measurements show that some small-sized animals

existed at the site. When we consider this, together with the

slightly higher coefficients of variation, it may not be too

unreasonable to suggest that domestication had been initiated but

that the size differences were yet too small to produce any

bimodality/ but this must remain a tentative suggestion.

However, recent excavations at Cayonii indicate that the

Prepottery Neolithic settlement was sustained up to the Halafian

Period (Ozdogan, M.and Ozdogan, Further analyses on the

material from pottery-bearing levels will most probably support the suggestion made above.

126 1. 3. Gritille: [Appendix: Pa<^es 367; 3 6 9,^31)

Gritille is a small mound located on the west bank of the

Euphrates river in southeastern Turkey. Excavations were carried out under the direction of Ellis and Voigt. The excavations have revealed remains of settlements ranging in date from Prepottery

Neolithic through to Early Bronze Age to Medieval and Ottoman periods (Voigt and Ellis, 1981; Ellis and Voigt, 1982; Voigt,

1985). The early Prepottery Neolithic settlement is part of the

PPNB related tradition and is divided mainly into two groups on the basis of architecture, a chipped stone industry and a stratigraphical break in between :

Upper Prepottery Gritille dated to 6050*150 - 6240*240 BC

Lower Prepottery Gritille dated to 6290*240 - 6920*90 BC (Voigt,

1988).

Faunal analyses have been undertaken by Stein who suggests that domestication had been initiated during the later stages of the

Prepottery Neolithic settlement (Stein, 1986; 1987).

The material analysed here is mostly from the Upper Prepottery

Neolithic phase (see 367 and 368)., but there are a few specimens from the Lower Prepottery Neolithic and later periods.

Figure 23 (p^- shows the distribution of the measurements of the Gritille pigs. It can be seen in the scatter diagrams, that most of the measurements are broadly distributed. Table 31 shows that the coefficients of variation are quite high; for tooth widths 2.0-13.0 (p^- 12.8).

127 Measurements N R MSOCV ( n - 1 )

d p 3 l 8 1 1 . 0 __ 1 4 . 3 1 2 . 9 1 . 3 1 0 . 0 d p * l 1 1 1 2 . 6 - 1 6 . 5 1 4 . 6 1 . 0 6 . 8 M k 1 0 14 . 3 - 2 0 . 2 1 7 . 3 2 . 0 1 1 . 5 4 2 0 . 0 - 2 2 . 4 2 1 . 3 1 . 2 5 . 6 m 3l 4 3 0 . 0 - 3 5 . 0 3 2 . 7 2 . 2 6 . 7 d p 4 l 1 1 1 7 . 2 - 2 1 . 8 19 .9 1 . 4 7 . 0 M j L 8 1 6 . 2 - 19.7 18.9 1.2 6 . 4 d p 3 w p 1 0 7 . 4 - 1 0 . 5 9 . 0 1 . 0 1 1 . 1 d p * w a 1 0 1 0 . 0 - 1 3 . 2 1 2 . 0 1 . 0 8 . 3 d p * w p 1 1 9 . 9 - 1 3 . 7 1 2 . 0 1 . 1 9 . 1 M*WA 1 0 1 2 . 6 - 1 6 . 6 1 4 . 6 1 . 2 8 . 2 M r w p 7 1 4 . 4 - 1 6 . 6 1 5 . 3 0 . 9 5 . 8 M W A 5 1 5 . 2 - 1 9 . 2 1 7 . 3 1 . 6 1 0 . 4 M 2 W P 4 1 4 . 5 - 1 9 . 0 1 6 . 7 1 . 9 1 3 . 0 m 3 w a 4 1 9 . 2 - 2 0 . 2 1 9 . 7 0 . 4 2 . 0 d p ^ w a 1 1 5 . 7 - 7 . 3 6 . 9 0 . 5 7 . 2 d p « w p 1 5 7 . 0 - 9 . 6 8 . 8 0 . 8 9 . 0 M tW A 1 0 9 . 8 - 1 2 . 2 1 1 . 0 0 . 8 8 . 1 M j WP 6 1 0 . 7 - 1 2 . 6 1 1 . 7 0 . 7 5 . 9 U l n a BPC 3 1 9 . 5 - 2 3 . 0 2 1 . 5 1 . 8 8 . 3 M C I I I B p 3 2 0 . 0 - 2 2 . 0 2 1 . 0 1 . 0 4 . 7 C a l c a n e u m GD 2 3 2 . 0 - 3 2 . 0 3 2 . 0 1 3 3 1 . 0 - 3 1 . 5 3 1 . 3 0 . 3 0 . 9 2 3 1 3 . 5 - 1 4 . 0 1 3 . 7 0 . 3 2 . 1

Table 31 : Metrical data from Gritille

Pages 166 and 172 compare the Gritille pigs with modern wild

Turkish pigs. As it is seen in the figures, specimens from Upper

Prepottery Neolithic levels are smaller. The evidence of this sample therefore strongly supports Stein's suggestion of early domestication (Stein, 1986). Unfortunately, specimens from lower

levels are very few. Few measurements from these levels fall into

the far right of our standard line which indicates that these specimens are even larger than our control group. Therefore,

there is no clear evidence that domestication was practised in these early levels or whether the specimens represent

intermediate animals or were truly wild animals.

128 1. 4. Hayaz Hoyiik: [Appendix: Pages. '2>69-3>7i/ A3>z)

Hayaz Hoyiik is a small mound situated on the right bank of the river Euphrates in the province of Adiyaman in southeastern

Turkey. It was excavated by the Netherlands Historical

Archaeological Institute in Istanbul under the direction of

Dr. Roodenberg, the director of the Institute. The mound represents cultures of Prepottery Neolithic, Chalcolithic, Early

Bronze Age to Medieval times. The earliest period has been dated to the 2nd half of the 7th millenium BC (Roodenberg, 1980; 1982).

Faunal material has been studied by Buitenhuis who suggests the presence of domestic pigs at the earliest stage, but also says that it could not be established with certainty on the basis of the available analytical techniques (Buitenhuis, 1985).

Paige lbO shows that the coefficients of variation are between

5.6-14.5 for tooth widths and 9.8-19.4 for postcranials. 2-U m Appendv* (pg. L'b'l) shows the distribution of the measurements.

Here again as it is the case in Gritille, a clear bimodality is absent but scatters are wide. Hayaz Hoyiik pigs from PPNB levels seem to be smaller than their modern Turkish wild counterparts

( p

Prepottery Neolithic levels (ca. 6050-6240 BC) of Gritille, which is a neighbouring site.

129 HtUUrtMDtl N R H SO CV H e a m r m n t i N R M SD CV (n-1) (n-1) Pl-ap « 3 37.0 - 55.0 46.3 9.0 Scapula GLp 11 26.0 - 49.0 40.3 6.1 15.1 3 40.5 - 59.0 50.2 9.3 SLC 14 16.5 - 33.0 25.7 4.1 15.9 12 2 23.5 - 71.0 47.3 33.6 BO 12 17.0 - 34.0 27.1 4.6 15.9 16b 13 18.0 - 47.0 30.3 6.7 SBC 18 8.5 - 17.5 12.9 2.7 20.9 A 12 13.5 - 23.0 17.3 2.6 Huaarus Bd 9 35.0 - 50.0 43.2 5.7 13.1 dP2-dP4 6 34.5 - 41.5 37.6 3.4 BT 9 23.0 - 38.5 32.9 5.3 16.1 2 66.5 - 75.0 70.9 6.0 HCT 9 17.5 - 25.5 21.7 3.3 15.2 V i 6 11.5 - 14.0 12.6 0.9 Radius BpP 11 23.0 - 37.5 30.8 4.9 15.9 dp*l 13 12.8 - 16.2 14.2 1.1 Dp 12 12.0 - 25.0 19.6 4.4 22.4 Ulna DPA 3 34.0 - 48.0 36.9 7.1 19.2 M 2L 24 14.2 - 19.7 17.2 1.4 ML 16 18.6 - 24.0 21.8 1.9 LPA 5 23.0 - 35.5 26.9 5.2 19.4 M*L 3 35.5 - 39.6 38.0 2.2 BPC 5 21.0 - 27.0 23.4 2.2 9.4 dP4l 16 17.2 - 20.9 19.6 1.2 MC III Bp 5 15.5 - 24.0 20.5 3.1 15.1 P«L 6 13.4 - 16.5 14.8 1.2 MC IV Bp 3 14.5 - 19.5 17.3 2.6 15.0 MjL 26 15.2 - 20.0 17.3 2.1 Tibia BdP 9 25.0 - 37.5 32.7 3.9 11.9 m 2l 14 19.3 - 25.1 21.9 2.0 Bfd 9 20.0 - 27.5 25.4 2.5 9.8 m 3l 11 27.0 - 43.7 36.0 4.3 Dd 9 22.0 - 32.0 28.4 3.6 12.6 dpJwp 10 7.3 - 9.4 6.6 0.7 SBD 5 17.0 - 29.0 42.7 4.6 20.2 dp*va 12 9.8 - 12.7 11.5 0.9 Astragalus CL1 IS 34.0 - 51.5 46.3 6.2 13.3 dp*vp 12 10.0 - 13.2 11.7 0.9 GLa 15 30.5 - 46.0 40.7 5.9 14.4 n t v a 21 11.6 - 16.8 14.4 1.3 Bd 15 21.0 - 34 .5 28.1 4.2 14.9 m rvp 22 11.6 - 17.0 14.7 1.4 LA IS 27.5 - 43.0 37.6 5.7 15.1 M‘WA 16 14.6 - 22.0 18.5 1.8 Calcanaua CD 2 33.5 - 33.5 33.5 0 0 M*VP IS 14.8 - 19.9 18.4 1.5 1 2 32.0 - 33.5 32.6 1.1 3.3 M3WA 6 17.5 - 23.5 21.4 2.0 2 2 13.5 33.5 13.5 0 0 dp4w« 17 5.6 - 7.4 6.6 0.5 dp4vp 11 7.5 - 9.8 8.7 0.7 P4W 6 6.1 - 9.5 8.9 0.5 MjUA 27 8.6 > 11.6 10.7 0.7 H j WP 28 9.2 - 13.0 11.3 0.9 MjWA 15 12.2 - 16.2 14.1 1.2 M j WP 16 12.4 - 17.1 14.3 1.3 n 3wa IS 14.5 - 24.5 17.2 2.5 Table 32 • Metr ical data from Hayaz

2. 5. Kumartepe: [Appendix: Pa^es 374^4?>*>)

Kumartepe is an early Pottery Neolithic site situated on the

Euphrates river in southeastern Turkey. The site was excavated by a joint project of the Urfa Museum in Turkey and The Netherlands

Historical Archaeological Institute and The Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago, and directed by Misir, Roodenberg and

Marfoe respectively. The site is dated to the middle or second

half of the 6 th millenium BC (Roodenberg, Wilkinson and Bayri-

Baykan, 1984).

Faunal analyses have been carried out by Clason (personal

communication with Clason 1986). Figure 25 in Appendix shows the

distribution of the measurements ( See ■for details).

The coefficients of variation are 4.2-9.9 for tooth widths

which is fairly high and this suggests some degree of

heterogeneity in the sample ( 131)-

130 Measurements N R M S D C V ( n - 1 )

d p 3 r 4 12.6 - 13.5 13.2 0.4 3.0 m 2l 4 17.4 - 18.5 18.2 0.6 3.2 d p 4 l 3 16.2 - 19.5 18.2 1.7 9.3 dp3wp 4 8.5 - 9.5 9.1 0.5 5.4 dp4wa 5 11.4 - 12.5 11.9 0.5 4.2 dp^wp 5 11.0 - 13.2 12.0 0.9 7.5 M TWA 6 13.3 - 17.0 14.4 1.3 9.9 M TWP 4 14.0 - 16.5 14.9 1.1 7.3 dp^wa 2 5.9 - 5.9 5.9 0 dp4wp 2 8.0 - 8.0 8.0 0 Scapula SLC 2 19.0 - 22.0 20.5 2.1 10.2 BG 2 21.0 - 21.5 21.3 0.4 1.8 SBC 2 9.0 - 9.5 9.3 0.4 4.4 H u m e r u s B T 2 30.0 - 34.3 32.2 3.0 9.3 HCT 2 18.0 - 18.0 18.0 0 0

Table 33 : Metrical data from Kumartepe

Pages 166 and . 172 compare the Kumartepe pigs with the modern

Turkish wild pigs. As seen in the figures, Kumartepe pigs are smaller than their modern wild counterparts which strongly suggests that pigs at the site were domestic. However, the people must have occasionally hunted the wild species which came to the vicinity as well.

1. 6 . Amouq: [Appendix: ?a^e.£> ^>75,

Amouq is an area which was part of northwestern Syria when The

Oriental Institute from Chicago excavated several mounds in the plain. It is now politically part of Turkey, situated in the southeastern part of the country within the province of Hatay

(Braidwood, 1986). It has a rather large overall sequence of assemblages extending from an eariy village community phase

(Phase A) into historical periods (Braidwood , .1360).

131 Ph ase A is a probably contemporary with the occupation of the Pre-Halaf period, in other words with the Hassuna period

(ca.6000 BC) (Flannery, 1983; Stampfli, 1983). The material analysed in this research came from the late period, except one specimen which comes from Phase A ( see ^ 7S ). Due to the small number of bones, all the phases are treated as one.

The material from Amouq has been studied by Flannery (1961, 1983) and by Stampfli (1983). According to Flannery there is only one tooth from the earliest phase (phase A) and it suggests that domestication was under way.Pig remains are relatively abundant

in later phases of Amouq (Phases B,C,D - ca. 5000-4000 BC and

E,F,G,H,I) and they are regarded as JiomesV\c but occasional large teeth are not surprising as Amouq is a low intermontane plain ridged by hills and wild pigs would have been present in the area (Flannery, 1983). According to Stampfli the bones of pigs from level A are not of large size, but according to his size range limits for wild animals they are nevertheless to be regarded as wild individuals. He thinks that during Phase B the presence of domestic pigs are far more likely. Our measurements show that the coefficients of variation are between

3.4-11.7 for tooth widths and 3.8-9.4 for postcranials

( Pa

smaller than the modern wild counterparts. Both these figures and the fairly high coefficients of variation suggest that Amouq

people hunted wild pigs as well as keeping their domestic stock.

132 Measurements N R M SD CV (n-1)

i 3/l3 - P 2 2 40.5 _ 40.5 40.5 0 0 PI-P 4 2 31.5 - 32.0 31.8 0.4 1.2 16b 5 20.0 - 40.5 25.7 8.4 32.6 A 4 10.0 - 16.5 14.4 2.4 16.6 dp2“dp 4 26.5 - 39.5 33.0 9.2 27.8 dp4l 3 19.2 - 19.5 18.2 0.5 2.5 p 4l 1 1 . 8 - 1 2 . 1 1 2 . 0 0 .2 1.6 M*L 3 13.6 - 18.0 15.1 2.5 16.5 m 2 l 3 18.0 - 2 2 . 6 19 .6 2 .1 10.7 dp4wa 3 6 . 6 - 7.1 6 . 8 0.3 4.4 dP4wP 4 0 . 0 9 . 0 0 . C 0. 4 4 . 6 2 7.9 0 . 1 II. 0 (l. 1 1 . 2 MjWA 2 8.7 - 1 0 . 0 9 . 4 0.9 9.5 MiWP 3 9.5 - 10.5 9.9 0.5 5.0 H2WA 2 1 1 . 2 - 11.7 11.5 0.4 3.4 M2 WP 4 1 1 . 0 - 14.1 1 2 . 8 1.5 11.7 S c a p u l a CLP 3 32.5 - 36.0 34.3 1.8 5.2 SLC 3 20.0 - 21.5 20.8 0.6 3.8 BG 4 20.5 - 23.5 22.1 1.6 7.2 SBC 4 9.0 10.0 9.5 0.6 6.3 H u m e r u s Bd 4 38.0 - 43.0 41.2 2.0 6.7 BT 3 29.0 - 32.5 31.3 2.0 6.3 HCT 4 19.0 - 21.0 21.0 0.9 4 . 4 U l n a D P A 2 33.5 - 38.0 36.0 3.5 9.7 L P A 3 24 . 0 - 27.5 25.3 1.9 7.5 BPC 4 19.5 - 20.5 2 0 . 0 0.4 2.0 MC I I I Bp 14 . 5 - 16.5 15.5 1 . 4 9 .0 A s t r a g a l u s GL1 4 39.5 - 48.0 43.0 3.9 9.0 4 36.0 - 39.0 39.0 3.5 8.9 4 25.0 - 27.1 27.1 2.5 9.2 4 32.5 - 35.9 35.9 3.4 9.4 Table 34 : Metrical data from Amouq

2. Lebanon

Ksar'Akil: [Appendix: Pages 2>7 6 -*iS6 , ^ < 0

The Palaeolithic rock shelter of Ksar'Akil in Lebanon is located

10 km northeast of the city of Beirut. It was excavated by an

American team from Boston College (Ewing, 1947; Murphy, 1939).

The excavators distinguished 37 stratigraphic levels, numbered I through XXXVII from top to bottom. The shelter was occupied during the Middle Palaeolithic, Upper Palaeolithic and

Epipalaeolithic (=Mesolithic). Animal remains were analysed first by Hooijer (1961) and later by Kersten (1989) who suggests that the wild pig is the fourth most abundant animal of the assemblage. Figure 26 (pg- - shows the distribution of pig

133 renains from various periods (from Middle Palaeolithic to

Mesolithic) of Ksar'Akil. None of the measurements show any

binodality and the measurements are clustered on the right of our

standard line. Pa<^es 16 7 and 172 , show that the measurements

fr>m Ksar'Akil are larger than modern wild pigs from Israel.

TdJles 35 shows the measurements data for the Ksar'Akil

population. Coefficients of variation range between 3.8-5.6 for

tcoth widths and 4.3-8.1 for postcranials, suggesting that the

Ksr'Akil population is a homogeneous wild population.

Maasremnts RM SO CV HcMurtBtnta NR M SD CV (n-1) (n-1) 49.5 _ 73.0 62.7 12.0 19.1 Scapula CLp 11 36.0 - 48.5 42.8 4.7 10.9 12 75.0 _ 87.5 79.8 5.4 6.7 SLC 14 25.0 - 34.0 29.3 2.6 8.8 C 26.0 . 32.0 29.5 3.1 10.5 BG 7 23.0 - 35.0 28.4 4.9 17.2 P*-P 40.5 _ 46.0 43.1 2.3 5.3 SBC 13 11.5 - 17.0 14.2 1.8 12.6 dp3l 13.0 _ 16.5 14.3 0.8 5.5 Huaarus Bd 5 44.5 - 51.0 47.1 2.4 5.0 d p 4l 14.5 _ 16.4 15.4 0.7 4.5 BT 9 33.0 - 41.0 37.4 2.9 7.7 HjL 16.4 _ 21.1 18.9 1.1 5.8 HCT 12 21.5 - 27.0 24.3 1.8 7.4 ML 21.0 _ 27.0 24.7 1.5 6.0 Radius BpP 12 32.5 - 40.0 36.7 2.6 7.0 H>L 33.5 _ 45.9 78.6 3.1 8.0 Op 13 24.0 - 29.5 25.9 1.6 6.1 dp4l 20.5 _ 24.4 21.9 1.0 4.5 Bfd 2 34.5 - 37.5 36.0 2.1 5.8 P«L 15.0 _ 17.8 16.5 0.7 4.2 Ulna DPA 2 51. 5 - 53.0 52.3 1.1 2.1 MjL 15.3 . 22.5 18.7 1.5 8.0 LO 2 70.5 - 73.0 71.8 1.8 2.5 MjL 19.a _ 27.6 24.2 1.6 6.6 LPA 3 27.0 - 31.0 28.3 2.3 8.1 M 3L 34.0 _ 49.5 41.7 4.1 9.8 BPC 4 32.0 - 34.5 32.8 1.2 3.6 dplvp 8.3 _ 10.8 9 . 8 0 . 6 6 .1 Tibia BdP 15 34.0 - 40.0 37.0 1.9 5.1 dp*va 11.4 _ 13.7 12.5 0.6 4.8 Bfd 16 25.5 - 29.5 27.9 1.2 4.3 dpfwp 11.1 - 14.0 12.5 0.7 5.6 Dd 16 28.5 - 35.0 32.3 2.1 6.5 h*wa 14.3 - 3 7.3 15.4 0.6 3.8 Astragalus GL1 22 47.0 - 56.5 52.1 3.0 5.7 Hrwp 14.2 - 17.0 15.5 0.7 4.5 GLin 26 43.0 - 53.0 46.8 3.0 6.4 M 2VA 18. 0 - 21.2 19.6 0.9 4.5 Bd 26 26.5 - 35.0 30.7 2.3 7.4 II2 VP 17.0 - 21.5 19.6 1.0 5.1 LA 30 39.0 - 47.0 42.7 2.3 5.3 H 3WA 17.8 - 24.8 21.8 1.6 7.3 Calcanaum GD 7 32. 5 - 39.0 34.2 2.3 6.7 dp4wa 7.0 - 8 . 3 7.7 0.4 5.1 1 6 33.0 - 35.0 33.9 1.1 3.2 dp«wp 8.3 - 12.0 10.2 0.6 s.a 2 8 13.5 - 17.5 15.0 1.3 8.6 P4W 9.0 - 12.0 10 . 4 0.5 4.6 Hj WA 10.6 - 13.6 12.0 0.6 5.0 HjVP 11.8 - 14.4 12.9 0.6 4.6 hjVA 14.2 - 17.8 16.0 0.9 5.6 H?HP 15.3 - 18.4 16.9 0.8 4.7 HjVA 17.0 - 24.5 19.4 1.0 5.1

Table 35 : Metrical data from Ksar 'Akil

3. Israel

3.1. Kebara: [Appendix: Pac^es 3B7, a '2»5‘)

Kd)ara cave is situated to the south of Vadi el-Mughara and was

exravated by a number of archaeologists. It is Mousterian,

134 Aurignacian, Kebaran, Natufian and finally Bronze Age to recent

in date (Schick and Stekelis, 1977). Specimens measured for this study come from Middle and Upper Palaeolithic levels and this small sample shows homogeneity ( see -for cieia.\\.s ).

Coefficients of variation are 3.1-5.6 for tooth widths and

0.7-3.3 for postcranials (Table 36).

Measurements NRM SD CV (n -1 )

d p *l 6 14.2 _ 16.2 15.1 0.7 4.6 8 16.5 - 19.8 18.8 1.1 5.8 M2L ML 14 22.0 - 28.0 24.6 1.5 6.0 M3L 2 34 . 4 - 38.0 36.2 2.5 6.9 dp4l 4 21. 4 - 23.2 22.2 0.9 4.0 P4L 7 15.4 - 16.6 15.9 0.4 2.5 MjL 10 16.2 - 19.8 18.4 1.2 6.5 m 2l 11 22.5 - 26.3 24.3 1.2 4.9 m 3l 2 41.1 - 44.0 42.6 2.1 4.9 dp4 wa 6 11.5 - 13.0 12.1 0.6 4.9 dp^wp 6 12.2 - 13.2 12.5 0.4 3.2 M*WA 8 14.5 - 16.9 15.4 0.8 5.1 Miwp 8 15.0 - 16.9 15.4 0.6 3.8 M WA 14 17.4 - 21.2 19.2 0.8 4.1 M2WP 13 18.1 - 21.0 19.2 0.8 4.1 m3wa 2 20. 3 - 22.0 21.2 1.2 5.6 dp4wa 5 7.2 - 7.9 7.5 0.3 4.0 dp4wp 4 9.6 - 10. 5 9.9 0.4 4.0 P4 W 7 8.5 - 10.9 9.9 1.0 4.9 M2WA 11 10.8 - 13.3 12.1 0.6 4.9 m2wp 10 12.1 - 13. 3 12.7 0.4 3.1 m 2wa 11 15.0 - 16. 4 15.8 0.5 3.1 m2wp 11 15.9 - 17.2 16.5 0.6 3.6 m3wa 10 18.2 - 20.0 19.1 0.6 3.1 Astragalus GL1 2 51.0 - 51.5 51.3 0.4 0.7 Bd 3 30.0 - 34.5 32.2 1.1 3.4 LA 2 40.5 - 42.5 41.5 1.4 3.3

Table 36 : Metrical data from Kebara

Almost all the measurements represent larger animals than present

day wild pigs from Israel, suggesting that the pig remains from

Middle and Upper Paleolithic levels only belonged to wild

animals ( 167, Ml).

135 3. 2. Hatula: [Appendix: ?a^e

rhe Natufan and PPNA site of Hatula is situated near Latrun.

?aunal material was studied by Davis (1985). The comparison of the measurements with those of modern wild pigs from Israel is shown on pa^es 167 and 172. As it can be seen in the Figures,

:he measurements of Hatula pigs represent large animals.

3. 3. Hayonim: (Appendix: ?a.c^e

iayonim is situated in western Galilee (Davis, 1982). The few neasurements presented \n A^pervcUx (p<^. are from Upper falaeolithic and Natufian levels. The comparison of them with the nodern wild pig measurements are on pa^es 167 and ^72.. Here again the sample is too small and there is no particular evidence rhich suggests domestication. *

I. 4. Netiv Hagdud: [Appendix: ? a ^ e

?he site is located on the western side of the Salabiyah Basin in the lower Jordan Valley at an altitude of 210 m. below sea level.

:t was excavated by Bar-Yosef, Gopher and Goring-Morris (1980).

Only three specimens were available for study and they are from

the PPNA period. The comparison of the measurements are the with

the modern wild pigs are presented in Figure 13.2 (p^. YI3>V

136 The sites of Ein Gev IV and I which represent the Kebaran and

Geometric Kebaran A cultures respectively are situated on the east coast of the Sea of Galillee (Davis, 1974, 1982). The distributions of the small number of measurements are presented

in Appendix ( pg. A3$,) . The distributions do not show any heterogeneity. Coefficients of variations are between 3.6-7.3 for the tooth widths, Cp^S- U 7 ^ compare the pigs from Ein Gev with the modern wild pigs from Israel.

Tooth widths are more or less the same size as those of the present day animals but the postcranial measurements are larger.

1 6 b 2 3 0 . 0 - 3 0 . 5 3 0 . 5 0 . 4 1 . 3 A 2 1 7 . 0 - 1 7 . 5 1 5 . 3 0 . 4 2 . 3 M 1 - m 3 2 7 6 . 5 - 7 7 . 5 7 7 . 0 0 . 7 0 . 9 P ? - P 4 2 4 3 . 5 - 4 4 . 0 4 3 . 8 0 . 4 0 . 9 P 4L 5 1 5 . 0 - 1 6 .9 1 5 . 8 0 . 8 5 . 0 M j L 5 1 5 . 8 - 1 7 . 7 1 6 . 7 0 . 8 4 . 7 m 2l 5 2 1 . 8 - 2 6 . 5 2 3 . 9 1 . 8 7 . 5 M-)L 5 3 7 . 0 - 3 9 . 5 3 7 . 8 1 . 1 2 . 9 P 4 W 6 8 . 4 - 1 0 . 5 1 0 . 0 0 . 4 4 . 0 M 1 W A 6 1 0 . 6 - 1 5 . 5 1 1 . 0 0 . 4 3 . 6 M ^ W P 4 1 1 . 2 - 1 2 . 5 1 1 . 7 0 . 6 5 . 1 m v a 2 6 1 3 . 6 - 1 6 . 5 1 5 . 0 1 . 1 7 . 3 M 2 W P 6 1 5 . 0 - 1 7 . 2 1 6 . 1 1 . 0 6 . 2 m 3 w a 5 1 7 . 1 - 1 9 . 4 1 8 . 5 0 . 9 4 . 8 Ulna DPA 3 4 3 . 0 - 5 1 . 5 4 8 .0 4 • A 3 . 1 LPA 2 2 8 . 5 - 3 4 . 0 3 1 . 3 3 . 9 1 2 . 4 BPC 2 3 0 . 5 - 3 8 . 0 3 4 . 3 5 . 3 1 5 . 4

Table 37 : Metrical data from Ein Gev

3. 6 . Salabiyah: [Appendix: 391').

Salabiyah is situated on the eastern fringes of the Salabiyah basin in the lower Jordan Valley. Excavations were carried out at th® site by Bar-Yosef and Gopher (1980).The measurements of one juvenile upper jaw which belongs to the PPNA period are presented in Appendix ^91) . The jaw seems to be more or less the same size as modern counterparts from Israel ( p^- 167).

137 1 7. (Atlit): [Appendix: Page 391)

Alit is a multi-layered site located in a cave and the terrace ii front of it. The terrace descends from the Carmel range wstward to the Mediterranean coast near Atlit. The site was frst surveyed and excavated by Stekelis (1942), then by Noy,

Lgge and Higgs (1973). It is stratigraphically complex. The mterial studied here belongs to the submerged PPNB site of Atlit wich is located near the inlet of Atlit (Galili, 1985; Galili ad Weinstein-Evron, 1985; Galili, 1987). The faunal assemblages wre studied by Horwitz and Tchernov (1987) who suggest that the pgs from the site were wild. The measurements of the single

M

3 8 . Yiftahel: [Appendix: Page 391).

Tie PPNB site of Yiftahel is situated on the banks of Nahal

Yftahel on the fringes of the Beit Netufa Valley in lower

Gdilee. The site was discovered and excavated by Lamdan and

Da/ies (1983) and excavation was also carried out by Garfinkel

(39 8 5) . The faunal assemblages were analysed by Horwitz (1987 a) wb suggests that the pigs from the site represent wild animals.

Figures 10.2 and 11.2 (pgs. 167, 173) compare the measurements available with those of the modern wild pigs from Israel. The sample from the site is really too small to say anything about dcnest icat ion.

158 3. 9. Jericho: [Appendix: 436')

The mound of Jericho is situated 12 kms. north of the Dead Sea in the Jordan Valley and it is 230 m. below sea level. The site was first discovered by Warren in 1869. Major excavation was first undertaken by Sellin and Watzinger, then continued by J.Garstang and J.B.E. Garstang (1947). The last excavations at the mound took place under the direction of Kathleen Kenyon and were published in a long series of preliminary reports. The following cultures are present: Natufian, PPNA, PPNB, PN, Chalcolithic and later periods (Kenyon, 1981).

The faunal assemblage of the site was analysed by Clutton-Brock

(1971; 1979). According to her the remains of pig from the PPNB levels (ca.7000 BC) are marginally smaller than those of the preceeding PPNA levels, so it could be postulated that domestication or at least human interference with a wild population of pigs was begining at this time (Clutton-Brock,

1979). Material studied here is derived from various periods, but is represented by only a few specimens. Distribution of the measurements is highly scattered (See A56 for cJeta-vVs ).

However, all the tooth width measurements which represent the animals from Prepottery Neolithic levels fall on the right of our standard line while the ones which represent the animals from later levels fall on the left. Pa^es 167 and 175 also show that the animals from Proto-Neolithic, PPNA and PPNB levels are larger, both compared to modern Israeli wild pigs and also ones which come from the later periods.

139 i* (n-1) (n-1)

16b 29.1 _ 33.0 29.1 0.5 18.5 Scapula GLp 7 - 49.5 43.4 3.9 8.9 A 20.0 - 23 0 20 0 2 8 14.0 SLC 7 - 33.5 30.0 3.0 10.0 15.0 - 19.3 17.6 1.5 8.5 BO 8 - 35.0 30.1 3.4 11.2 MH2L2L 19 .4 - 24.6 21.9 2.5 11.4 SBC 8 - 16.0 13.5 1.5 11.1 M3L 25.0 - 43.0 35.2 7.5 21.3 Hu m i u i Bd 4 - 57.0 44.5 10.7 24.0 dp4l 17.0 - 23.5 19.5 2.0 10.2 BT 7 - 42.0 34.1 5.9 17.3 P*L 12.5 - 15.2 13.6 1.4 10.2 HCT 8 - 26.5 22.3 3.7 16.5 MjL 14.6 - 18.6 16.8 1.5 8.9 Radius BpP 5 - 34.0 31.1 3.4 10.9 i a . o - 24.5 21.3 4.6 21.5 Op 5 - 24.0 22.0 2.0 9.0 "4x 12.2 - 15.7 14.4 1.4 9.7 Ulna 0PA 2 - 46.5 45.8 1.1 2.4 m rvp 12.5 - 15.8 14.8 1.2 8.1 LPA 3 - 33.0 31.0 2.3 7.4 M‘WA 15.0 - 20.6 18.1 2.1 11.6 BPC 4 - 28.0 24.0 3.6 15.0 m2vp 14.3 - 20.5 17.7 2.2 12.4 MC III Bp 5 - 21.0 19.8 0.9 4.5 h3va 16.6 - 23.0 20.4 2.6 12.7 GL 4 - 92.0 82.9 9.2 11.0 dp4wa 6.4 - 8.2 7.0 0.8 11.4 MC IV Bp 3 - 20.0 19.0 1.3 6.8 dP4«P 8.0 - 11.8 9.6 1.4 14.5 Palvls LAR 6 - 39.0 34.8 3.4 9.7 P«W 8.2 - 9.0 8.6 0.4 4.6 Pcaur DCP 8 - 29.0 25.3 2.7 10.6 HjWA 9.8 - 12.4 10.9 1.1 10.0 Bp 2 - 69.5 64.5 7.1 11.0 Mj WP 7.7 - 10.0 8.9 1.0 11.2 Bd 5 - 58.0 54.9 3.7 6.7 H?WA 12.2 - 15.8 14.0 2.5 17.8 BT 7 - 28.5 25.8 1.7 6.5 M jWP 12.8 - 15.8 14.3 2.1 14.6 Tibia Bp 3 - 62.0 58.0 4.0 6.8 BdP 4 - 37.0 35.6 1.4 3.9 Bid 4 - 30.5 28.4 2.2 7.7 Od 4 - 32.5 31.3 1.2 3.8 Astragalus GL1 11 - 51.0 47.1 2.3 4.8 Bd 10 - 32.0 28.4 2.0 7.0 LA 11 - 42.5 38.8 2.3 5.9 Calcanaua GO 2 - 36.0 35.0 1.4 4.0 1 2 - 33.5 32.5 1.4 4.3 2 2 - 14.5 13.7 0.8 5.8 MT III Bp 2 — 20.0 19.5 0.7 3.5 m 00 le Metrical data from Jericho

3.10. Abou Gosh: [Appendix: PaL^es , L'if)

The site of Abou Gosh is situated in a small valley in the Jordan

hills 12 kms. west of Jerusalem at a height of 7000 m. above sea

level. An initial trial excavation was carried out at the site by

Neuville and Mallon (Neuville, 1929; 1934). Later Perrot (1969)

and then Dolfus and Lechevallier continued the excavation (Dolfus

and Lechevallier, 1969; Lechevallier, 1978). There are two

distinct stratigraphical units at the site ; one is PPNB and the

other PN (Perrot 1969; Lechevallier, 1978; Gopher, 1985).

The material analysed here come from the prepottery neolithic

levels (personal communication with Ducos, December, 1987). The

distribution of measurements is very scattered. (see pa^e

4 3 7 for details ). Comparison of the measurements from Abou Gosh

with those of modern Israeli wild pigs shows that some

measurements are larger but also some are smaller than the

present day wild pigs from Israel 'US, 17^).

140 (n-1)

dpA *p 2 8.5 - 9.5 9.0 0.7 7.7 MiWA 2 10.4 - 11.5 11.0 0.8 7.2 M jWP 2 12.0 - 12.5 12.3 0.4 3.2 M*L 2 17.2 - 19.2 18.2 1.4 7.6 Scapula GLp 8 35.0 - 48.0 41.3 4.4 10.6 SLC 6 22.0 - 28.5 25.2 2.3 9.1 \ BG 10 24.0 - 33.0 27.6 2.9 10.5 SBC 10 10.5 - 16.0 13.1 1.9 14.5 Humerus Bd 8 43.0 - 55.0 47.4 4.1 8.6 BT 7 33.0 - 40.5 36.0 2.9 8.0 HCT 10 20.5 - 26.0 23.1 1.7 7.3 Rad i us BpP 4 32.5 - 36.0 34.1 1.7 4.9 Dp 4 22.5 - 25.0 23.8 1.2 5.0 Bd 3 32.5 - 41.5 36.7 4.5 12.2 Bfd 5 29.0 - 37.0 32.3 3.3 10.2 Ulna LPA 2 24.5 - 30.0 27.3 3.9 14.2 MC III Bp 3 18.5 - 22.0 20.2 1.8 8.9 MC IV Bp 2 20.0 - 22.0 21.0 1.4 6.6 Femur Bd 3 47.7 - 50.5 48.8 1.5 3.0 BT 4 22.5 - 24.5 23.5 0.9 3.8 Tibia BdP 7 31.5 - 36.5 33.5 1.9 5.6 Bfd 7 24.5 - 27.5 26.1 2.0 7.6 Dd 7 28.5 - 32.0 30.1 1.2 3.9 Astragalus GL1 20 41.5 - 53.5 47.4 3.2 6.7 GLm 21 37.5 - 47.5 42.4 2.5 5.8 Bd 19 27.0 - 34.0 30.1 1.7 5.6 LA 2 34.5 - 44.5 39.4 2.5 6.3 MT III Bp 6 16.5 - 19.0 18.0 1.2 6.6 MT IV Bp 2 16.0 - 17.5 16.8 1.1 6 . 5 Table 39 : Metrical data from Abou Gosh

3.11. Beisamoun: [Appendix: Pacjes - U0\ ,

This Prepottery and Pottery Neolithic site is located in

aorthvest part of the sea of Galilee (Lechevallier, 1978). The

sample studied here is mixed. There is no clear indication of

bimodality but as the Figure 1>o \n. (^cj. i^aY.shows, the

distributions of measurements are slightly skewed. Comparison of

the Beisamoun measurements with those of the modern wild pigs

irom Israel shows that some of the Beisamoun measurements are

larger and some smaller than those of the modern wild pigs from

Israel ( U S ; V7Y). T&VAe Ao (pcy \hl) shows that the coefficients

«f variations are between 3.1-8.5 for tooth widths and

S.3-12.9 for postcranial dimensions. The little skewing shown

in Appendix (pc^. and the relatively smaller size of

leisamoun pigs compared with the modern wild pigs from Israel

( p<^s. 16S and 173 ) suggest that there is some degree of

heterogeneity.

141 I n-i j n-’« 3 51.5 - 57.5 53.8 3.2 5.9 Scapula GLp 14 33.0 - 44.0 36.3 7.7 1’ 3 54.5 - 65.0 58.5 5.7 9.7 SLC 15 21.0 - 21.0 24.1 8 2 lb 13 23.5 - 55.0 36.4 9.3 25.9 BG 14 22.0 - 27.5 24.5 6.5 A 13 16.0 - 26.5 21.7 3.0 13.8 SBC 16 9.0 - 14 .0 11.5 12.1 - M-H3 7 67.0 - 75.5 69.3 3.0 4.3 Huaarus Bd 31 36.0 49.5 43.4 6.9 10 11.5 - 13.8 13.1 0.7 5.3 BT 32 26.5 - 38.5 33.8 8.2 d-31 - di4l 17 13.3 - 15.5 14.4 0.8 5. S HCT 33 17.5 25.0 22.0 7.7 48 15.0 - 19.4 17.6 1.1 6.2 Radius BpP 7 25.5 - 31.5 28.6 7.3 ‘2L 39 18.0 -26.1 21.4 1.4 6.5 Op 7 18.0 - 21.5 20.1 6.9 t2L - l3L 21 28.0 - 36.2 32.5 2.3 7.0 Ulna DPA 3 38.0 42.0 40.0 5.0 9 19.2 - 23.0 21.1 1.2 5.6 LPA 3 24.5 - 27.0 26.2 5.3 di4l - •4L 8 13.4 - 16.2 14.9 0.9 6.0 BPC 3 22.0 23.5 23.0 3.9 1at 46 14.5 - 19.5 17.9 1.2 6.7 Palvls LAR 3 33.0 . 37.0 35.2 5.6 ijL 36 16.1 - 26.7 22.0 1.8 8.1 OA 2 34.0 - 40.0 37.0 11.3 1jL 24 31.9 -41.5 36.9 2.5 6.7 Paauc Bd 3 40.0 - 47.5 44.0 8.6 dpkvp 12 8.8 - 10.0 9.3 0.4 4.3 BT 4 21.0 - 24.0 21.8 6.8 dp^wa 14 10.5 - 13.0 11.9 0.7 5.8 Tibia BdP 5 30.0 38.0 33.3 6.9 dpfwp 15 11.0 - 13.3 12.3 0.7 5.6 Bfd 4 24.5 _ 27.5 25.8 5.0 ffWA 41 13.1 - 15.7 14.4 0.7 3.1 Od 5 25.5 _ 30.5 28.1 6.7 KVP 41 13.1 -16.1 14.9 0.7 4.6 Aatraqalua GL1 4 34.5 _ 45.5 41.5 11.8 KVA 39 16.1 - 19.5 17.9 0.9 5.0 GLa 4 31.0 42.5 37.8 12.9 k w p 35 16.5 - 19.4 17.9 0.8 4.4 Bd 4 23.5 _ 27.0 25.9 6.5 WvA 20 18.4 - 22.0 20.2 0.8 3.9 LA 4 29.0 _ 39.5 35.1 12.8 <|R« 9 6.8 - 8.2 7.5 0.5 6.6 MT III Bp 2 13.5 _ 15.0 14.3 7.6 dRVp 16 8.3 - 10.4 9.6 0.5 5.2 >4« 9 8.4 - 11.1 9.4 0.8 8.5 KVA 44 9.2 - 12.3 11.2 0.6 5.3 MVP 39 10.5 - 12.8 11.7 0.6 5.1 H>VA 34 12.5 - 16.2 14.6 0.9 6.1 I* VP 35 13.1 - 16.7 14.7 1.1 7.4 KVA 28 13.9 - 19.4 17.2 1.2 6.9 Table 40 : Metrical data from Beisamoun

3,12. Munhata: [Appendix: Faeces Aoz, , L t t )

Tie site of Munhata is located in the Jordan Valley, some 11 kms.

scuth of Lake Kinereth, 215 m. below sea level. It was first

irvestigated by Zory (1958) and excavated by Perrot and a series

oi preliminary reports were published by him (Perrot, 1963; 1965;

1566; 1967). Rich Neolithic levels of PPNB and PN cultures were

eicavated. A C14 date from one of the PPNB levels is 7210-5000 BC

(Copher, 1985). Faunal reports were published by Ducos (1968).

Tie distributions of the measurements do not show any significant

b;modality for this site either but suggest some heterogeneity

( see ^ . .. Comparison of the pig remains from various

levels of Munhata with the modern Israeli wild pigs are shown on

pL$e.s and M'b . As it is seen in the figures most of the

iwasuremnts are smaller than those of the modern ones. Table

slows that the coefficients of variation change between

4 3-10.0 for tooth widths and 7-18 for postcranial x measurements. In the light of this evidence, it might be

siggested that domestication had started.

142 HtiiortMnti SD CV (n-1)

16b a 22.0 _ 34.0 26.9 4.1 15.4 Scapula GLp 2 35.0 - 36.0 35.5 0.7 19.7 A a 1S.0 . 19.5 17.4 1.6 9.1 SLC 3 22.5 - 23.0 22.8 0.3 13.1 5 12.fi _ 14.2 13.2 0.6 4.5 BG 3 21.5 - 26.5 23.3 12.0 dp4l 5 14.2 _ 15.1 14.6 0.3 2.0 SBC 4 10.0 - 12.0 10.8 11.1 10 17.0 - 19.2 ia.2 0.8 4.3 HUMIUI Bd 2 40.0 - 42.5 41.3 4.3 H2LH2L 5 21.0 - 23.5 22.0 1.2 5.4 BT 2 31.0 - 32.0 31.5 2.2 «P4l a ia.a - 20.8 19.9 0.6 3.0 HCT 2 20.5 - 20.5 20.5 0 0 _ BpP 2 29.0 - 34.3 21.5 Hi** is 15.7 19.0 17.8 1.0 5.6 Radius 39.5 m2l 4 20.6 - 24.6 22.1 1.8 8.1 Op 3 19.0 - 27.5 23.7 18.1 dplvp 5 S.l _ 9.6 a .9 0.5 5.6 Ulna DPA 4 32.5 - 46.5 36.5 18.3 _ dp*ws S 10.5 12.1 11.5 0.6 5.2 LPA 4 25.9 - 36.0 29.3 17.1 dp4wp 5 10.9 _ 13.5 12.4 1.0 BPC 4 20.0 - 27.5 23.0 16.0 H 10 13. 4 - 16.0 14.3 o.a HC ZZ1 Bp 3 20.0 - 23.5 21.7 8.2 Hrwp 10 14.3 _ 16.a 14.8 0.9 6 10 MC ZV Bp 4 16.5 - 22.0 19.5 11.7 6 16.7 _ 19.0 17.9 0.8 4.4 GL 4 B7.0 - 98.0 91.9 5.7 HfWA - Bp 3 39.5 - 47.5 14.5 h 2wp 4 17.2 19.2 IB . 0 0.9 Paaur 51.5 dp4wa a 6.4 _ 7.3 6.9 0.3 4.3 Bd 3 20.0 - 26.0 23.7 13.5 dp4wp 10 a.3 - 9.6 9 0 0.4 4.4 Tibia Bp 4 • 29.0 - 34.5 31.6 8.2 HjWA is 10.0 _ 12.1 10.7 0.5 4.6 BdP 4 22.0 - 26.5 24.3 9.4 HiVP 14 10.9 _ 12.9 11.5 0.7 6.0 Bid 4 24.0 - 30.0 26.9 10.0 M?VA 4 13.0 - 15.7 14.6 1.2 a.2 Astragalus GL1 7 40.0 - 51.5 45.9 3.6 7;a MjWP 4 12.a _ 16.3 15.0 1.5 10.0 GLa 10 36.0 - 45.5 40.9 7.0 MjUA 2 16.2 _ 16.4 17.3 1.6 9.2 Bd 7 25.5 - 33.0 29.7 8.4 LA 9 33.5 - 42.0 37.8 7.6 Calcanaua OD 5 28.0 - 36.0 32.2 3.9 12.1 1 3 25.0 - 33.0 28.7 4.0 13.9 2 5 11.0 - 15 9 12.5 1.6 12.8 Table 41 : Metrical data from Munhata

3.13. Sefunim: [Appendix: A04)

S e f u n i m is a small mound in Mount Carmel and represents

Prepottery Neolithic and Pottery Neolithic. The Figure 12.3 and

13.3 compare the Sefunim pigs with the modern wild Israeli pigs.

It seems that both small and large individuals were present (p

3.14. Neve Yam: [Appendix: Pacjes 40 u / UL<0)

Neve Yam is situated 1,5 km south of thevillage of Atlit and 3,5 km west of the Carmel caves. This terminal Pottery Neolithic site is dated to 4200/4300 BC and it is suggested that the estimated life span of the settlement was ca 300 years

(Prausnitz and Wreschner, 1971; WrescWner, 1983). The assemblage of animal bones was analysed by Horwitz (.1327 c) who

suggests that the pigs were domestic. Few measurements available

for the present study fall on the left of the Hakel standards

( See 44 0 ). Figure 12.3 shows that Neve Yam pigs are

smaller than present day wild pigs of Israel ( 168).

143 .15. Tell Dan: [Appendix: Pa^e 404) he Pottery Neolithic site Tell Dan is located in the northwest t£ Israel. Faunal remains from the site were analysed by Horwitz

1987b). On the basis of their being similar in size to the

Ddern wild pigs from Israel, Horwitz suggests that the pigs from his site were wild. Figures 12.4 and IS. 3 show that the easurements of these specimens are smaller than those of the mdern wild pigs from Israel 174).

116. Nahal Betzetz: [Appendix: 405, 406/440)

Nhal Betzetz has a sequence of cultural levels starting from

PNB which is dated late 8th millenium and early 7th millenium BC o to the Byzantine period (personal communication with Gopher,

Nvembei) 19 87).

Te distributions of measurements of quite a few animal bones fom various levels are presented in Appendix ( p<^. 4 4 0 ) . The omparison of the measurements with the modern wild pigs from

Irael is to be seen on pace's 16*1 - and 174 , . It does not seem tat there is any clear separation between the levels. Following tble shows that the coefficients of variation are 0 .2-8.8 ,.

Hwever, specimens from PPNB levels seem to be larger than their mdern counterparts but it is difficult to draw conclusions with crtainty from such small and mixed samples.

144 Measurements N R M SD CV ( n - 1 )

d p 4 l 2 1 4 . 8 1 5 . 0 1 4 . 9 0 . 1 0 - 1 7 . 9 0 . 9 5 . 0 MiL 4 1 7 . 2 1 9 . 2 M 2 L 3 2 1 . 0 - 2 3 . 7 2 2 . 2 1 . 4 6 . 3 d p 4 i 3 1 9 . 0 - 2 0 . 2 1 9 . 8 0 . 7 3 . 5 d p * wa 2 1 1 . 6 - 1 3 . 2 1 2 . 4 1 . 1 8 . 8 d p 4 w p 2 1 2 . 1 - 1 2 . 9 1 2 . 5 0 . 6 4 . 8 M 4 1 3 . 8 - 1 5 . 7 1 5 . 2 0 . 9 5 . 9 H*WP 5 1 4 . 6 - 1 6 . 4 1 5 . 5 0 . 6 3 . 8 M WA 2 1 8 . 2 - 1 8 . 5 1 8 . 4 0 . 2 1 . 0 M 2 W P 3 ‘ 1 7 . 8 - 1 8 . 2 1 7 . 9 0 . 2 0 . 2 d p 4 w a 3 6 . 9 - 7 . 5 7 . 1 0 . 2 4 . 2 d p ^ w p 3 9 . 0 - 9 . 4 9 . 1 0 . 2 2 . 1 M j W A 2 1 1 . 1 - 1 1 . 5 1 1 . 3 0 . 3 2 . 6 M j W P 2 1 2 . 0 - 1 2 . 3 1 2 . 2 0 . 2 1 . 6 S c a p u l a S L C 2 2 2 . 5 - 2 4 . 5 2 3 . 5 1 . 4 5 . 9 H u m e r u s BT 2 2 5 . 0 - 2 7 . 5 2 6 . 3 1 . 1 6 . 8 A s t r a g a l u s G L 1 9 4 1 . 5 - 5 1 . 5 4 7 . 6 3 . 7 7 .7 G L m 10 3 8 . U - 4 6 . 0 4 2 . 1 2 . 6 6 . 1 B d 11 2 7 .0 - 3 4 . 0 3 0 . 8 2 .4 7 .7 LA 10 3 7 .0 - 4 3 . 0 3 9 . 2 2 . 5 6 . 3 C a l c a n e u m GD 2 3 5 . 5 - 3 7 . 0 3 6 . 3 1 . 1 3 . 0 1 2 3 2 . 5 - 3 5 . 0 3 3 . 8 1 . 8 5 . 3 2 4 1 3 . 5 - 1 5 . 0 1 4 . 0 0 . 7 5 . 0

Table 42 : Metrical data from Nahal Betzetz

3.17. Tell Tao: [Appendix: Pa^es Uoi, U02,

\nother multi-period site in Israel is Tell Tao which represents

:he periods of PPNB, PM, Chalcolithic and EBA (personal

rommunications with Horwitz, November 1987). The distribution of

neasurements from various periods is represented in Appendix

ipg. A41) -• Scatter diagrams of the data do not show any clear

separation between periods. The few tooth width measurements

ivailable from PPNB levels fall on right of our Hakel standards.

*able 43 shows that the coefficients of variation are between

1-16.8 in tooth widths

145 Mi f u r i M n t t RM SO CV NinuraMRts N r H SO cv (n-1) (n-l) P1-P4 49.5 Scapula GLp 4 29.0 - 35.5 32.7 3.4 12 40.0 - 67.0 53.5 19.1 36.7 SLC 4 17.5 - 24.5 21.4 3.2 16b 25.0 - 39.5 30.3 5.6 18.4 BG 4 20.5 - 25.0 22.6 2.8 A 14.5 - 24.0 18.8 3.4 18.0 SBC 4 10.0 - 11.0 10.4 0.4 PX-dp< 43.0 Huaarus Bd 4 34.5 - 39.5 37.7 2.2 pl.p4 51.0 BT 4 27.0 - 31.0 29.3 1.8 dpj-dp, 35.5 - 39.5 37.4 1.7 4.5 HCT 4 17.5 - 20.0 18.6 1.1 P7-**4 35.5 - 36.0 36.8 1.8 4.8 Ulna LPA 2 24.0 - 25.0 24.5 0.7 dp3j 13.2 BPC 2 27.5 - 29.0 28.3 1.1 dp«l 12.4 - 13.9 13.4 0.7 5.2 MC III Bp 2 16.0 * 17,5 16.6 1.1 15.6 - 10.6 17.0 1.2 7.0 HC IV Bp 3 14.0 - 19.0 16.0 1.3 H2Lm 2l 19.2 - 23.0 21.3 1.9 8.9 Astragalus GL1 2 46.0 - 49.0 47.5 2.1 dp4l 17.4 - 20.0 19.2 1.1 5.7 OLa 2 40.0 - 44.5 42.3 3.2 P4L 12.3 - 16.1 14.2 2.7 19.0 Bd 2 26.5 - 35.0 30.8 6.0 Mj L 16.1 - 18.0 17.1 0.7 4.0 LA 2 37.5 - 41.0 39.3 2.5 m2l 19.4 - 23.1 20.8 1.8 8.6 Calcanaua GO 2 28.5 - 34.0 31.3 3.9 dp3vp 10.1 2 2 13.5 - 14.5 14.0 0.7 dp^va 11.0 — 11.2 11.1 0.1 0 dp4«rp 11.2 - 11.7 11.5 0.4 3.4 H*VA 13.0 - 15.1 13.9 0.8 5.7 wrwp 12.6 - 15.5 14.2 1.0 7.0 M WA 16.5 - 21.0 18.6 2.3 12.2 H2WP 16.0 ~ 20.5 18.3 2.3 12.5 Table 43 : Metrical h 3w a 26.4 data dp4va 6.2 _ 6.0 6.9 0.7 10.1 dp4wp 6.0 - 10.0 8.9 0.8 8.9 from Tell Tao P4« 6.3 - 10.6 9.5 1.6 16.8 HjWA 9.4 - 11.6 10.5 0.9 8.5 MjWP 10.1 - 12.4 11.1 0.6 7.2 H2WA 12.6 - 15.9 14.0 1.2 8.5 M 7 WP 12.7 - 16.1 14.5 1.4 9.6

When compared with the modern wild counterparts the animals from

PPNB levels are larger while the ones from later levels are

generally smaller. In view of this evidence, it might be suggested that domestic pigs were present in PN levels.

4. Jordan

Ain Ghazal: (Appendix: Pages UUl)

Ain Ghazal is located on the west bank of Wadi Zarqa in

highland Jordan, near Amman and excavated by Rollefson

(Rollefson, 1984; Rollefson , et.al., 1984). According to the

excavators it is a major Neolithic settlement that spanned three

major periods of cultural development including the PPNB (7250-

6200 BC), PPNC (ca. 6200-75800 BC) and Early Pottery Neolithic

(ca. 5500-5000) (Rollefson and Simons,1385; pres$)»

Preliminary faunal analyses were carried out by Kohler and

146 Mtzger. Metzger wrote a manuscript particularly on pig remains

fom the site. She says that some of the postcranial bones are sailer than those of the wild animals although most of them are

lrge. However she does not draw any firm conclusions on the a.tiquity of domestication (Metzger, 1986).The material studied

hre is from Prepottery Neolithic levels (personal communication wth Metzger, April 1986). The sample is very small and . the

masurement distribution does not give any clear separation

( see A42 ). As , ^ages and 17A show, some of the

masurements are larger and some smaller than present day wild

pgs from Israel. The coefficients of variations are 0-5.3 for

toth widths and 6.1-11.9 for postcranials (Table 44).

Mcsuzaaants H R M 9D CV Miiiuttatnts N R M SD cv (n-1) (n-1) B 1 24 s Scapula GLp 3 35.0 - 47.5 39.2 7 2 18.3 dH 4 11 3 - 14.2 13.2 1.3 9.8 SLC 3 22.5 - 24.5 23.3 1 0 4.2 dpi 2 IS 2 - 15.3 15.3 0.1 0 BG 3 23.5 - 29.0 25.7 2 9 11.2 3 ia 4 - 18. 6 18.6 0.2 1.0 BBC 3 12.0 - 16.0 13.5 2 2 16.2 M2 1 21 S Huaarus Bd 3 52.0 - 55.5 54.0 1 8 3.3 P. 1 IS 0 BT 7 32.0 - 41.5 37.1 3 8 10.2 "J 17 0 - 19.6 18. a 1.0 5.3 HCT 7 20.5 - 26.5 24.4 2 9.0 H3 1 42 5 Radius BpP 3 29.0 - 35.5 31.2 3 8 12.1 dpn> 4 a 6 - 9.4 9.1 0.4 4.3 Dp 3 ia.o - 24.5 20.3 3 6 17.7 dpta 2 12 2 - 12.3 12.3 0.1 0 Ulna LPA 3 23.0 - 26.0 24. 5 1 5 6.1 dvp 2 11 9 - 12.1 12.0 0.1 0 BPC 5 ia.o - 27.5 21.6 3 9 18.0 MA 3 14 4 - 14.8 14.7 0.2 1.0 MC III Bp 2 20.0 - 21.5 20.8 1 1 5.2 MJ> 3 14 4 - 15.8 14.9 0.8 5.3 MC IV Bp ■2 15.5 - 18.5 17.0 2 12.9 HA 1 ia 4 Tibia BdP 3 27.5 - 35.5 31.8 4 0 12.5 M* 1 17 6 Bf d 3 23.5 - 29.0 26,7 2 3 8 . 6 P« 5 11 - 11.4 11.1 0.2 1.8 Dd 3 23.5 - 33.5 30.2 2 9 9.6 5 11 S - 12.2 11.9 0.3 2.5 Astragalus -CL1 9 40.0 - 49.5 45.6 8 6 . 1 H? 1 IS 3 GLa 9 36.0 - 44.0 40.5 2 4 8.9 Bd 9 25.0 - 33.0 28.6 2 5 8.7 LA 10 25.0 - 39.5 36.0 4 3 11.9 MT III Bp 3 13.5 - 18.5 16.3 2 6 •15.9 MT IV Bp 2 16.5 - i a . s 17.5 1 4 8.0

Table 44 : Metrical data from Ain Ghazal

5. Syria

5.1. Mureybet: [Appendix: Pac^es AiO, LW$)

Th site is situated on the left bank of the Euphrates, east of

Alppo in northern Syria,in Mesopotamian desert steppe and plain

147 (Howe, 1983). It was first excavated by von Loon (1968) and then by Cauvin (1972; 1975; 1978a; 1978b). It is a Prepottery

Neolithic site, but the earliest horizons are composed of late

Natufian deposits. van Loon defined XVII levels dated from c a .

8300-7500 and Cauvin 4 levels dated ca 8500-6900 BC. The first preliminary faunal report was written by Perkins and the material from subsequent years was published by Oucos (1975; 1978).Small numbers of pig remains were identified as Sus scrofa lvbicus by

Ducos (1978). Figure V5 on AA^ shows the distribution of measurements. Most of the measurements fall on the right of the standard measurement line and as can be seen on fages 169 and 173. They are also larger than modern wild pigs. Data in

Table 45 indicates that the coefficients of variation are quite small suggesting that the population was homogeneous. In view of this evidence, we can conclude that the pigs in Mureybet were wild and this conclusion is compatible with that of Ducos (1978).

Maasuramants N R M SO CV MMittttMnti N R H SO CV (n-1) (n-1)

Table 45 : Metrical data from Mureybet

5. 2. Ramad: [Appendix: Pa^es AH, All, AAO

The material from the site of Ramad, which is situated in

southern Syria is from levels I and II which represents the PPNB

148 period, dated to 6260 + 50 - 5930 + 55 BC (Gopher, 1985). Figure on page AAA shows that there is no clear separation in the distribution of measurements. pages 165. and 11A compare the

Ramad measurements with those of the wild pigs from Israel. Some measurements are larger some smaller than the modern wild pigs.

The coefficients of variation are 0-7.5 for tooth widths and

4.8-8.8 for postcranial measurements (Table 46).

CV CV N t U U K M n t f N R H SD RH so (n-1) (n-1)

12 67.0 Scapula GLP 9 38.5 - 44.5 40.6 2.2 5.4 16b 20.5 SLC 10 22.5 - 31.5 27.2 2.3 8.4 16.5 BG 9 21.5 - 28.0 25.3 1.8 7.1 49.0 SBC 10 9.5 - 13.5 12.2 2.7 22.1 14.1 Hu m i u i Bd 11 40.0 - 49.5 45.3 3.5 7.7 _ 31.5 - 38.0 dD4l 13.6 16.0 14.6 0.7 4.7 BT 11 34.1 2.4 7.0 17.0 _ 20.3 18.9 1.0 5.2 HCT 13 19.5 - 25.5 21.9 1.7 7.7 _ 7 - Mm 2L2l 20.8 24.2 22.5 1.4 6.2 Radius BpP 29.5 37.5 32.3 3.0 9.2 Dp 7 20.5 - 27.5 2 . 7 11.7 m 3l 32.4 22.9 Jdp«l 21.5 _ 22.6 22.1 0.8 3.4 Ulna DPA 4 34 .0 - 39.0 37.0 2.2 5.9 18.0 _ 19.2 18.7 0.6 2.5 LPA 7 21.0 - 29.0 25.9 2.3 8.8 MjL - m 2l 20.8 _ 24.8 22.8 1.6 7.0 BPC 8 17.5 26.0 21.3 2.6 12.2 MjL 36.5 _ 39.4 37.6 1.6 4.2 MC III Bp 11 17.0 - 22.0 18.7 1.5 8.0 dp3vp 9.1 MC IV Bp 4 15.5 - 18.5 17. 5 1. 4 8.0 dp*wa 10.5 _ 12.5 11.9 0.5 4.2 Tibia BdP 10 30.0 - 35.5 32.8 1.8 5.4 dp

le 46 : Metrical data from Ramad

5 . 3 . Tell Aswad: [Appendix: P a g e s A'l'i, A A

Tell Aswad is located in the Damascus basin and is dated between

6590-110 - 7790-120 BC (Gopher, 1985). The distribution of a few measurements is presented in Appendix ( pg- A A 5) and the comparison of Aswad pigs with modern wild pigs from Israel is seen on pages 170 and 175. As the figures indicate, some measurements represent large animals and some small,but the sample is not large enough to draw any firm conclusion as tothe

occurrence of domesticates.

149 5. 4. Umm Qesir: [Appendix: Pages 4 1 L , 415, A46)

Jmm Qesir is located on the Habur drainage below the modern town

3f Hasseke in northern Syria. It is a rather late settlement lated around 4800 BC. It contains a continuous sequence through to the Middle Bronze Age (personal communication with Zeder,

Vpril 1987). Measurement distributions show no bimodality and all neasurements are smaller than our control group from Hakel and

[ran (see p a<3e )* ■ They are also smaller than the modern

■fild pigs from Israel ( see <170/ 17 5 1 . Coefficients of rariation vary between 2.5-6.8 (Table 47). All these suggest

:hat the Umm Qesir population was homogeneous domestic copulation.

Measurements N R M SD CV ( n - 1 ) C , 1 8 0 dp3 l 4 1 1 . 2 - 1 2 . 7 1 2 . 2 0 . 7 d p 4l 5 . 7 8 1 2 . 2 - 1 4 . 2 1 3 . 4 0 . 7 5 . 2 8 1 5 . 2 - 1 7 . 5 1 6 . 9 0 . 8 4 . 7 Mm42lL 6 1 9 . 8 - 2 1 . 9 2 0 . 4 1 . 4 6 . 8 m3l 4 2 7 . 4 - 3 1 . 7 3 0 . 3 2 . 5 8 . 2 d p 4 l 1 2 0 . 4 P*L 3 1 3 . 0 - 1 4 . 0 1 3 . 5 0 . 5 3 . 7 MaL 9 1 6 . 0 - 1 7 . 6 1 7 . 0 0 . 5 2 . 9 m 2l 6 2 0 . 4 - 2 2 . 4 2 1 . 3 0 . 7 3 . 2 m 3l 2 3 2 . 9 - 3 3 . 2 3 3 . 1 dp3wp 0 . 2 0 . 6 6 7 . 5 - 8 . 5 7 . 9 0 . 3 3 . 7 dp4wa 5 9 . 7 - 1 1 . 3 1 0 . 7 d p 4wp 0 . 6 5 . 6 7 9 . 5 - 1 1 . 4 1 0 . 6 0 . 7 6 . 6 M I'WA 9 1 1 . 5 - 1 4 . 0 1 3 . 1 M fwp 0 . 9 6 . 8 1 0 1 1 . 7 - 1 3 . 9 1 3 . 2 0 . 6 4 . 5 M‘ WA 8 1 5 . 6 - 1 7 . 2 1 6 . 7 m2 v p 0 . 6 3 . 5 4 1 5 . 0 - lo .O 1 5 . 4 0 . 4 2 . 5 m3va 6 1 6 . 5 - 2 0 . 4 1 8 . 1 1 . 3 7 . 1 dp 4wa 1 6 . 0 dp^vp 2 8 . 0 - 8 . 2 8 . 1 0 . 1 P«W 1 . 2 2 8 . 0 - 8 . U 8 . 0 0 0 MjWA 8 8 . 9 - 1 . 0 9 . 7 0 . 4 M| WP 4 . 1 1 0 1 0 . 0 - 1 1 . 0 1 0 . 4 0 . 4 3 . 8 M2VA 6 1 3 . 1 - 1 4 . 2 1 3 . 7 m2wp 0 . 4 2 . 9 6 1 3 . 1 - 1 4 . 6 1 3 . 7 0 . 6 4 . 3 m3wa 2 1 4 . 5 - 1 4 . 9 1 4 . 7 0 . 3 2 . 0 U lna BPC 2 1 7 . 5 — 1 8 . 0 1 7 . 8 0 . 4 2 . 2

Table 47 Metrical data fr o m Umm Qesir

150 A * M i l

6. 1. Tepe Asiab: [Appendix: Facies A16, AA7)

This is a small low mound overlooking the Karasu river about 6 km east of Kermanshah, central Zagros intermontane Valley. It is a site which represents an "Incipient Agricultural Communities"

(IAC). period (Braidwood, Howe, ei. 3.1. i960; Braidwood, Howe and

Reed, 1961; Howe, 1983). The suggested date for the site is somewhere between 9000-7000 BC. The site was excavated by The

Oriental Institute's Joint Prehistoric Project with the

University of Tehran. The whole faunal assemblage from the site was published by Bokonyi (1977), but Flannery also studied the pig remains for his unpublished MA thesis (1961) and in his later

(3 per (1983 ) .

Measurement distributions are presented in Appendix Cpg- 4A7 ) and the comparisons with modern wild pigs from Iran are given on

170 an<3 175 . Distributions do not show any bimodality and most of the specimens are larger than our control groups from

Hakel and Iran. Table 48 gives the measurements data.

Measurements N R M SD cv (n-1)

B 1 33.5 Hl-M, 1 86.5 h \ l 1 21.5 ML 2 23.4 - 24.0 23.7 0.4 1.6 M3L 1 41.7 dp4l 1 21.8 P 4L 3 15.6 - 18.0 16.4 1.4 8.5 M j L 4 17.6 - 19.2 18.2 0.8 4.0 m 2l 6 24.0 - 25. 8 24.8 0.9 3.6 M^jL 5 40.8 - 49.6 43.0 3.8 O 8.8 M “WA 70. 3 70 . r> 70. 4 0. 1 0.4 M^WP 7 19.3 - 19.5 19.4 0.1 0.5 d p 4 wa 1 7.8 d p 4wp 1 10.0 P 4 W 3 9.8 •• 11.3 10.6 0.8 7.5 M jWA 4 11.0 - 12.5 11.9 0.6 5.0 M j WP 5 12.6 - 13.5 13.2 0.4 2.2 M ?VA 7 14.4 - 17.2 15.5 0.9 5.8 M?WP 8 15.2 - 18.4 17.0 1.0 5.8 m 3w a 5 17.1 - 21.2 19.3 1.5 7.8 Humerus BT 2 36.0 - 37.5 36.8 1.1 2.9 Ulna LPA 2 31.5 - 35.0 33.3 2.5 7.5 CD rr Table Metrical data from Asiab

151 6. 2. Sarab: [Appendix: Facies A17 / AA7^

Tepe Sarab in the Kermanshah Valley in Iran is a tiny site dated approximately to 7000-6000 BC (Braidwood, Howe, Reed, 1961).The excavators say that the architecture does not give any impression of year round permanent settlement even though the artifactual elements are developed and pottery occurs.The whole faunal assemblage was analysed by Bokonyi (1977), Flannery studied pig remains from the site for his MA thesis (1961) and in a later paper (1983). Bokonyi suggests that the pigs were domesticated on the basis of one measurement of an along with two unmeasurable extremity bones (Bokonyi, 1977). Flannery says that he never saw the Mj, and it is possible that this particular specimen comes from one of the superficial levels which he says he rejected (Flannery, 1983). I found more specimens under the label of Sarab in the Field Museum Natural History in Chicago The distribution of the measurements of these specimens are represented in Appendix (p<^. AA7) and show that most of the few measurements are larger than our control groups. Comparison of

Sarab measurements with those of the modern wild pigs from Iran shows that the Sarab pigs are larger ^7 0 ). The claim of the occurrence of domestic pigs at the site is thus based on the one M^ and two unmeasurable extremity bones which Bokonyi says are undoubtedly from domesticated pigs. He also says that in the absence of local domestication they must have been introduced from somewhere else (Bokonyi, 1977). This claim must be treated with caution, particularly when dealing with such a small and

152 mixed sample. As a result, we can only say that the evidence is inconclusive.

6 . 3. Siahbid: [Appendix: Pa^es 07, AO)

The Halafian-Early Ubaidian site o£ Siahbid lies 10 km northeast of Kermanshah Valley . On the basis of the similarity of its archaeological assemblages to Halaf and the Early Ubaidian range of northern Iraq it is dated to 5000-4000 BC (Braidwood, 1960;

1962) .

Faunal material from the site was analysed by Bokonyi (1977) and pig remains by Flannery (1961; 1983). According to Flannery the pig measurements indicate a small race of domestic pig (Flannery,

1983). According to Bokonyi they are rather small animals resembling the Neolithic domestic pigs of Central and

Southeastern Europe. He says that there is no good evidence of local domestication and thus they must have arrived in the

Kermanshah Valley from another area, just as in the case of Sarab

(Bokonyi, 1977).

The data show that all measurements are smaller than those of our control groups (p^. AAa). Pictures 11.5 anc^ W 5 175^ also show that they are smaller than the modern Iranian wild pigs. The measurements data of this small sample do not show any heterogeneity ( p^. 150.

153 Measurements N R MSD CV ( n - 1 )

P l " d p 4 2 4 5 . 5 4 6 . 0 4 5 . 8 0 . 4 0 . 8 1 6 b 2 24 . 0 - 2 4 . 0 24 . 0 0 0 A 2 16 . 5 - 1 7 . 5 1 7 . 0 0 . 7 4 .1 d p 2 - d p 4 3 3 2 . 5 - j b . 5 3 5 . 2 2 . 3 6 . 5 dp4l 4 19 . 5 - 1 9 . 9 19 . 7 0 . 2 0 M ^ L 5 16 . 7 - 1 8 . 2 1 7 . 5 0 . 6 3 . 4 d p 4 w a 4 6 . 4 - 6 . 5 6 . 4 0 . 1 1 . 5 d p 4 w p 5 8 . 1 - 8 . 8 8 . 5 0 . 3 3 . 4 M jWA 4 9 . 8 - 1 0 . 4 1 0 . 1 0 . 3 2 . 9 M i WP 4 1 0 . 2 - 1 1 . 0 1 0 . 7 0 . 4 4 . 9 S c a p u l a SLC 2 1 8 . 5 - 1 9 .5 1 9 . 0 0 . 7 3 . 6 BG 2 2 0 . 0 - 2 0 . 5 2 0 . 3 2 . 4 1 . 9 SBC 2 1 0 . 0 - 1 0 . 0 1 0 . 0 0 0 H u m e r u s HCT 2 1 4 . 5 - 1 5 . 5 1 5 . 0 0 . 7 4 . 6 M T I V B p 2 1 5 . 0 - 1 5 . 0 1 5 . 0 0 0

Table 49 : Metrical data from Siahbid

6 . 4. Dehshavar: [Appendix: ?ac^es LW, AA*')

Dehshavar is an Uruk site dated ca. 3500 BC and it lies approximately 7 km east of Kermanshah (Braidwood, 1960 ). Bokonyi who analysed the faunal remains from the site suggests that the pigs are small-sized, and that there is no evidence of local iomestication. Therefore it seems likely that they had been introduced to the site by people arriving from another area

(Bokonyi, 1977). iowever, very few measurements taken for this study are smaller

:han those of the modern wild pigs from Hakel and Iran (see p<^.AA&

;or details ). Pigs from the site may thus extend into the

iomesticated range, but the sample is too small to say whether

:hey have been introduced from somewehere else as Bokonyi

juggests or they were domesticated locally.

154 f. 5. Ganj Dareh: [Appendix: P a c ^ A^Ai^, AA^)

Ganj Dareh is located in Gamas Ab Valley in western Iran and was excavated by Smith (1972). The date based on C14 and arti£actual comparison indicate that the site was occupied during the 8th and possibly 9th millenia BC. C14 dates are 84507150 - 69607170 BC

Taunal material from the site was studied by Hesse who thinks that the pigs were not domesticated (Hesse, 1977).

Figure 41 AA^') suggests that the Ganj Dareh population

N Haaauranants N R M SO CV Maasuranenta R M SO CV (n-1) (n-1 )

Pj-dp* 1 Scapula GLp 2 45.5 - 48.0 46.8 1.8 3.8 dp2-dp4 1 SLC 2 31.5 - 34.0 32.8 1.8 5.4 1 BO 2 31.0 - 35.0 33.0 2.8 8.4 dp*l 1 SBC 3 13.0 - 16.0 14.8 1.6 10.8 dp«l 3 - 16.4 15.8 O.S 3.1 Huawrua HCT 3 20.5 - 22.5 21.7 1.0 4.6 2 - 17.6 17.6 0.1 0 Radlua BpP 7 31.0 - 39.0 34.9 2.8 8.0 ML 1 24.0 Dp 9 22.5 - 26.5 24.3 1.1 4.5 dp4l 4 - 22.5 22.1 0.3 1.3 Bd 2 39.0 MjL 3 - 23.2 20.6 2.4 11.6 Ulna OPA 3 42.0 - 63.5 50.8 11.3 19.4 M;L 2 - 25.8 25.2 0.8 3.1 LO 2 75.0 - 80.5 77.8 3.9 5.0 M 3L ' 2 42.0 - 44.5 43.3 1.8 4.1 LPA 4 30.0 - 33.0 31.2 1.3 4.1 dp3wp . 2 - 9.5 9.3 0.3 3.3 BPC 4 26.5 - 30.0 28.2 1.5 5.3 dp*wa 2 12^0 - 12.2 12.1 0.1 0 MC IV Bp 3 14.2 - 21.5 18.2 3.7 20.3 dp«wp 1 GL 2 89.0 - 91.5 90.3 1.8 1.9 M^VA 3 - 15.9 15.7 0.2 1.2 Aatxaqalua GL1 4 42.5 - 49.0 45.4 3.4 7.4 M fvP 2 16.0 - 16.1 16.1 0.1 0.6 GLn 4 39.0 - 44.0 41.9 2.2 5.2 m 2wa 3 - 20.4 20.0 0.4 2.0 Bd 4 26.0 - 30.0 28.4 1.8 6.3 Mi VP 1 19! 0 LA 5 35.0 - 40.0 37.6 2.4 6.3 dp4va 3 - 8.7 8.5 0.2 2.3 Calcanaua GO 3 33.5 - 36.5 34.8 1.5 4.3 dp4wp 5 - 10.7 10.4 O.S 4.8 1 3 31.5 - 34.5 33.5 1.7 5.0 MjWA* 3 - 13.8 12.8 1.1 8.5 2 3 13.5 - 15.5 14.3 1.0 6.9 Mj VP 4 - 14.7 13.6 1.1 8.0 M?VA 2 15.5 - 15.7 15.6 0.1 0.6 M 7VP 2 - 17.6 16.7 1.3 7.7 M3VA 2 - 19.8 19.7 0.2 1.0

Table 50 : Metrical data from Ganj Dareh

Paiges and VT5 show that most of the measurements are

larger than those of their modern counterparts. The general

conclusion thus agrees with Hesse's conclusion.

155 . 6. Ali Kosh: [Appendix: F ^ e s 420, 4 5 o') li Kosh is one of the sites situated in the Deh Luran plain hich lies on the steppe at the base of the Zagros mountains in orth Khuzistan (Hole,Flannery and Neely, 1969). The site is ated to 7000-5800 BC. According to Flannery there is no evidence or pig domestication at the site (Flannery,1983). figure 42 (p^' 4*50) shows the distribution of the measurements, inong tooth measurements there is an upper jaw fragment with nd which fall on the left of the standard. Except for that, he rest of the measurements are larger than those of the Hakel nd Iranian wild pigs. The measurements of this fragment fall ell apart from the rest of the measurements. However, the period

<£ thi upper jaw fragment is not known ( see 4 2.0 ) . It light come from much a later period. Apart from this particular oecimen all the rest of the material shows that the Ali Kosh pgs were wild.

6 6 . Tepe Sabz: [Appendix: Faeces 42.0, 450)

Tpe Sabz also is situated in the Deh Luran Plain near to Ali

Ksh and it is dated to ca. 4100 - 3800 BC. According to Flannery te evidence for pig domestication is very scanty and only one mndible fragment might belong to a domestic pig. Flannery says tat there is no evidence of local domestication at Tepe Sabz, bt Tepe Sabz people might have occasionally received domestic pgs from neighbouring regions as domestication was being

156 practised at such sites as Siahbild and Dehshavar (Flannery,

1983).

Apart from this mandible I found measurements of an , a proximal radius and a calcaneum which fall to the left of our standard values and thus suggest that Tepe Sabz pigs were domestic animals ( p<^. 171)-

6 . 6 . Hajji Firuz: (Appendix: Fages 421, 422, 451)

This is a low mound located in the Solduz Valley, south of Lake

Urmia, Azerbaijan Province northwestern Iran. The site was first excavated by Young and then by Voigt and Dyson(Voigt, 1983).

Three C14 determinations for the Neolithic Hajji Firuz period range between ca.5500-5100 BC. The faunal assemblage was analysed by Meadow who suggests that there are domestic and wild pigs at the site (Meadow, 1983).

Figure 43 on page 451 shows the distributions of the measurements. Most of the dimensions of the Hajji Firuz specimens fall to the left of the standards. However there are a few measurements which fall to the right of the standards suggesting that either they belong to wild animals or that there were some degree of size variation in early domesticates. When compared with the modern wild pigs from Iran, again a few large measurements stand out but most of the measurements represent small animals ( p

157 between 2.2-8.6 for tooth widths and 4.3-10.3 for postcranials (Table 51 ).

Measurements R M SO CV Measurements NR H SO cv (n-1) (n-1)

_ P i- d p 4 42.0 45.5 43.4 1.5 3.4 9eapula GLp 2 30.5 - 43.5 37.0 9.2 24.8 12 44.S BG 2 19.0 - 29.0 24.0 7.1 29.5 16b 25.0 Humerus Bd 3 37.0 - 39.5 38.3 1.3 3.3 A 19.0 HCT 3 17.5 - 19.0 18.2 0.8 4.3 14 63.0 Radius BpP 4 25.5 - 30.5 27.9 2.1 7.3 B 17.0 - 25.0 21.6 3.0 13. • Dp 4 16.5 - 20.0 18.3 1.4 7.6 dp3l . 11.7 _ 14.0 13.1 0.9 6.6 BPC 3 19.0 - 22.0 20.0 1.7 8.5

As a result we can say that the Hajji Firuz people had domestic

pigs but that occasionally they hunted the wild ones as well and

this conclusion agrees with Meadow's conclusion.

7. Iraq

7. 1. Palegawra: [Appendix: 451)

Palegawra rock shelter lies on low hills close to a lush well-

watered round-bottomed valley in the Zagros mountains. It

represents the terminal aspect of the food-collecting era, dated

to ca. 10 000 BC (Braidwood, Hoswe^ et. al. j 1960 ) . Preliminary faunal

analyses were undertaken by Turnbull and Reed (1974). The

distribution of the few measurements is presented in Appendix

( 452) . Dimensions generally fall to the right of the

158 standard line. Comparision of Palegawra pigs with modern wild pigs from Iraq shows that the tooth width measurements on a single jaw from Palegawra are smaller than those of the modern wild counterparts ( 17 1 and \li ). One explanation might be that the small measurements simply indicate an extreme of individual variation in one homogeneous population.

7. 2. Karim Shahir: [Appendix: Pages 42^, 452.')

Karim Shahir is an open air camp site situated in Chemchemal

Valley in the province of Kirkuk in the Zagros mountains. It represents the period of "Incipient Agriculture" and is dated to

9000-7000 BC (Braidwood/ Ho\we; ei.al., 1960; Howe, 1983). Some measurements of pig remains were published both by Flannery and

Stampfli who think that they represent wild animals. (Flannery,

1983; Stampfli, 1983). A few postcranial measurements available are presented in Appendix (pg-4siy F\gure IV 5 (pg.\7i) compare the

Karim Shahir measurements with those of the modern wild pigs from

Iraq. As the figures show, some of the measurements are small while some others are large and there is thus no particular evidence of domestication.

7. 3. M'lefaat: [Appendix: Pages 4 ASl)

M'lefaat is situated on the Khazir river, the major tributary of the Tigris river, at the border of the piedmont and Lower Zagros foothills (Howe, 1983). There is no absolute date for the site.

On the basis of archaeological assemblages the excavators say

159 that it is either earlier or later than Karim Shahir. The very small amount of bone recovered during the 4 to 5 days of excavation were studied by Turnbull (1983) who suggests that the pigs were wild, on the basis of two large metacarpals. The measurements of pig remains are presented in Appendix tpg._ .452') .

They fall to the right of our standards. As Figure 13.5 shows they are also larger than the present day wild pigs from Iraq (pg- ml

7. 4. Jarmo: [Appendix: Pages 424,415, A5!0

Jarmo lies in the Chemchemal valley in the south facing foothills of the Zagros mountains in Iraqi Kurdistan (Braidwood, Ho^e, a.1.

1960). The site was excavated by The Oriental Institute of

Chicago under the direction of Braidwood who says that the site represents "Primary Village Farming" communities and that the period spanned is ca. 7250-5750 BC, (so Jarmo would have fallen somewhere in the middle of this time span). Braidwood suggests that the site has a single phase of occupation the "Primary

Village Farming" phase, that there are indications of technological and typological development and change within this phase and more specifically, he dates the site to about

6750 BC. He also thinks that the site flourished for several hundred years (Braidwood, ^ -

General faunal analyses of Jarmo were published by Stampfli

(1983). Stampfli suggests, partly on the basis of an increase of the pig bones, and partly on basis of the measurements, which

160 fall below what he states are the lower limits in wild pigs in

the upper levels, that domestic pigs appear in the upper levels.

The appearence of domestic pigs in these levels was already

mentioned by Reed and Flannery who had previously made a few suggestions about the appearence of domestic pigs at Jarmo.

According to them domestic pigs were either introduced to Jarmo along with pottery from another site where domestication had

begun or just the knowledge of animal keeping was introduced to

the site, or pig domestication began at Jarmo independently of

developments elsewhere (Reed, 1961; Flannery, 1961; 1983).

According to Stampfli the transition from wild to domestic is

clear at Jarmo and that there is no need to consider the

possibility of an importation of domestic pigs (Stampfli, 1983).

The material analysed in this research is different from the

material analysed by Flannery and Stampfli as I could not find

the same specimens studied by them in the Field Museum, Chicago.

However, some other pig bones and teeth from different locations

were measured. The whole material has had to be treated as one

group because it was not possible to sort out the material

according to levels. Figure 45 o r \ pa.ge 453 shows the

distributions of measurements taken for this study. The

measurements do not show a clear separation but they are quite

widely spread and most of the measurements fall to the left of

the standards. The coefficients of variation seem to be

relatively high being 4.2-13.0 for tooth widths and 2.1-14.6

for postcranials ( pcj. \il)t

161 Measurements SO CV Measurements N R M SO CV (n-1) Humerus Bd 2 39.5 49.5 44.5 7.1 15.9 - 16b BT 2 30.5 38.5 34.5 5.7 16.5 HCT 2 19.5 - 24.0 21.8 14.6 A . 3.2 dp31 14.0 - 15.6 15.0 4.9 6.0 Radius BpP 3 28.5 - 36.5 32.2 4.0 12.4 - dp«l 13.2 - 17.4 15.0 1.6 10.6 Op 3 20.5 33.5 25.2 7.2 28.5 17.0 - 1. 4 9.0 Ulna BPC 4 22.5 - 34.0 27.1 1.9 7.0 21.0 15.5 - Mm 2Ll 25.5 23.0 2.0 8.6 MC III Bp 2 17.5 25.5 21.5 5.7 26.5 M3L 43.0 Pelvis LAR 2 32.0 - 33.0 32.5 0.7 2.1 - dp4l 18.7 - 21.2 20.2 1.2 5.9 DA 2 34.0 36.5 35.3 1.8 5.0 P«L 14.5 - 15.2 14.9 0.3 2.0 Astragalus GL1 7 41.0 - 48.0 43.5 3.2 7.3 - MjL 15.5 - 20.6 17.8 1.5 8.4 GLm 6 37.5 44.5 40.9 2.9 7.0 1.4 6.4 Bd 9 25.5 - 31.5 27.2 1.9 6.9 M;L 19.0 - 23.4 21.7 - 32.0 - 45.5 5.6 14.3 LA 8 34.0 39.5 36.3 2.1 5.7 m3l 39.1 - dp3vp 9.4 - 11.3 10.2 1.0 9.8 Calcaneus GO 4 27.2 40.5 34.6 5.4 15.6 dp* we lj.. 1 - 14.0 2.2 1.1 9.0 1 4 28.0 - 37.5 32.8 3.9 11.8 dp*wp 11.1 - 14.5 12.4 1.5 12.0 2 4 11.5 - 17.0 14.3 2.3 16.0 M^VA 13.6 - 16.2 14.8 0.9 6.0 M^VP 14.0 - 16.7 15.1 0.9 5.9 M*WA 16.0 - 18.8 17.9 1.3 7.2 M‘VP 16.4 - 19.8 17.9 1.5 8.3 Metrical data M3VA 20.7 - 23.5 22.1 2.0 9.0 Table 52 dp,va 6.2 - 8.0 7.1 0.9 12.6 from Jarmo dp«vp 8.5 - 10.2 9.4 O.S 5.3 P«w 8.7 - 10.0 9.2 0.6 6.5 MjWA 10.0 - 12.1 10.8 0.6 5.5 MjWP 10.6 - 13.2 11.4 0.7 6.1 M?VA 13.6 - 15.0 14.2 0.6 4.2 M7 WP 13.5 - 15.1 14.2 0.6 4.2 MjWA 14.5 - 20.0 17.6 2.3 13-0

Pa^es 171 and 176 compare the measurements of Jarmo pigs with those of the modern wild pigs from Iraq. In the case of tooth widths, except for two measurements (dpwp^ and M^WA) the rest of the measurements are smaller than the dimensions of their modern counterparts. Most of the postcranial measurements again seem to be smaller. This evidence indicates that there are domestic pigs along with wild ones at the site. In the absence of stratigraphical information we can not say anything about whether there were domestic pigs in the earlier levels. All we can say is that domestic pigs appear sometime during roughly five centuries of occupation at the site.

7. 5. Gird Banahilk: [Appendix: Pa^es 42.7,

The Halafian site of Gird Banahilk (ca.5000 BC) islocated in the

Diana Plain in northern Iraq (Braidwood,

162 The faunal remains from the site were studied by various

scientists but fully published only by Laffer (1983) who suggests that the pigs were domesticated. Before Laffer, Flannery analysed

the pig material from the site and suggested that the Banahilk

pigs are domestic (Flannery, 1961, 1983).

Measurements for pig bones from the site are presented in

Appendix . Almost all the measurements fall to the left

of the standards. The comparison of Gird Banahilk pigs with

their modern wild counterparts is shown on pa<^es 171 and 177 .

All the measurements seem to be smaller than those of the wild

pigs from Iraq. The coefficients of variation are between 2.6-

9.2 for the tooth width measurements and 5.0-12.6 for the

postcranials (Table 53 ). My conclusion from the sample studied

agrees with the conclusion of the previous analysts.

HtaiuctMnts N R M SD CV Measurements N R M SO CV (n-1) (n-1) Pi-dp 4 1 42.0 Scapula GLp 2.1 6.2 Px-P4 2 3.20 - 35.0 33.5 2 49.5 - 55.5 52.5 4.2 8.0 SLC 2 2.00 - 22.0 21.0 1. 4 6.6 16b 2 22.5 - 34.5 28.5 8.5 29.0 BG 2 2.20 - 26.0 24.0 2.8 11.6 A 2 15.5 - 18.5 17.0 2.1 12.3 SBC 2 1.05 - 12.5 11.5 1.4 12.1 pl.pi 1 4 80 Tibia BdP 2 2.70 - 29.0 28.0 1.4 5.0 dpj-dp4 1 375 Bfd 2 2.00 - 21.5 20.8 1.1 5.2 P7-P4 1 355 Dd 2 1.95 - 24.5 22.0 3.5 16.9 1 635 Astragalus GL1 6 3.80 - 51.5 43.5 5.5 12.6 4 11.3 _ 13.5 12.5 1.0 8. GLa 5 3.45 - 44. 5 37.8 4.0 10.5 dp«l 7 12.1 - 14.5 13.6 O.S S. Bd 5 2.30 - 27.0 24.3 1.9 7.8 11 14.6 - 19.5 16.7 1.3 7. LA 6 3.20 - 41.0 35.5 3.8 10.7 ML 6 18.0 - 23.3 19.8 1.9 9 . M*L 1 270 dp4l 5 18.6 - 19.9 19.2 0.5 2. P 4L 3 13.4 - 14.2 13.9 0.4 2.5 MjL 7 13.6 - 17.0 16.0 1.1 6 . h 2l 4 17.0 - 21.7 19.5 1.9 9. M jL 4 30.3 - 33.0 31.7 1.1 3. dpJvp 4 7.2 - 8.5 7.9 O.S 6. Table 53 : Metrical data from dp'wa 6 10.1 - 11.0 10.8 0.5 4 . dp4vp 7 10.0 - 11.6 10.8 0.7 6. M*VA 11 12.4 - 15.3 13.5 0.7 Gird Banahilk M^WP 11 12.2 - 15.7 13.6 0.9 6. M‘VA 6 14.8 - 18 .6 16.6 1.2 7. M^ VP 7 14.2 - 18.4 16.3 1.3 7. HJVA 1 17.8 dp4w« 5 6.0 - 6.4 6.2 0.1 1. dpavp 6 8.0 - 8.6 8.3 0.2 2. P4V 2 8.3 - 9.2 8.9 0.6 6. Mj WA 7 9.2 - 10.0 9.6 0.3 3. Mj VP 6 9.6 - 10.7 10.1 0.5 4 . M?VA 3 12.1 - 12. 5 12.3 0.2 1. M7WP 3 12.2 - 14 . 7 13.0 1.2 9 . m 3va 4 14.0 - 15.0 14.6 0.4 2.

163 7. 5. Matarrah: [Appendix: Z*l7 , k^U)~

This is an Hassunan-Samarran village located on the piedmont steppe of Iraq, not far from Kirkuk (Braidwood et. al. 1952). The preliminary faunal analyses were carried out by Reed who says that the collection of fauna is small but the pigs represent 25 % of the whole fauna (Reed, 1969). Flannery and Stampfli also suggest that the presence of a domestic form is highly likely as the pigs are relatively frequent in number and the percentage of juvenile animals is high too W&nnery, 1^35;

Our measurements from the site are shown in Appendix A ^ O •

Except for one dpA and measurements the rest of the dimensions fall to the left of our standards. All the measurements are smaller than those of the modern wild pigs from

Iranexcept one M^.L ( 171 and M (> )• The general impression derived from the measurements is that the Matarrah pigs were domestic.

164

166

LPPM - P M I L O-I ©

i*ViH

aN ctj t ■» _ > 9 X > < > *o I I X S CCCCCCCCCC XWIXW _ W X I W X C C C C C C C C C * C ■ * £ « £ « > i ti i i i i i • . i t i i i i- i > * i i ii ti .i i i . i • t i i . i ...... II Ml I I I I I I II 1 I | © M H M M V*» » * V OkCk at „_ *-• o * n * „ a a _ _ aaft N W

m m >*o m v

m * u r t*r,c»>-r r r *-m

S 3 X W I I • |Ift a W S Z Z W 167 11 I I I I I •O ° * * w m I I M I I I I I I I * * M » *•*«* M M M » W I O •O MNU •o «i a a i *otj "a x N. *0 *-

’ U3 ■*C a A) tL • cr •< ►— Ai 9 bi in u*

e n*e • “ -» O W . «o a. r> »*■ n ~ n ■* in — K» o r

2 2

rt rhelgcl ie uig h sadrs ae o te oen ape Iron sanples todern the on based standards the using sites archaeological jrot Figure 12.3: Log ratio diagrans coaparing the cranial «ean measurements of pig reaains froa archaeological sites using the standards based on the aodern samples froa the countries where each archaeological site belongs u 3 ’Lv. 2 ’ J J >

OB V _ *“ »*“ »*“ M “ l O *0 iitn. iitn. i ft ft I I

X TJ TJ • <• «• MKl M ftJ - M - «-» ftJ M MKl «• <• • W ft JJ*} ft 168 x £ 'D

I M I i i X X X X X X 3XX QV 2X 2 X X •-* •-* MMt-*- *0^^ w ki <»*«• X X X ■O'O X X X*0 *0 *t O

Log ratio ^ * > 5 O- a a a a Oi a X VM X 3) ** XXX T3TJ x x x xar-a ti na M M I HMHI i n w»*« v * * w *w »>J w Oi a a Ck I 9m xxx*o-o xxxvo i • a i i i Oi i i a < c *» c c (C( c c UMN* * W MM* t* •x *03B X X *035 _ _ •o * *0 > CTJ » > 5 > *a > v » TJ rrrrMrpr*-*- ^ ^ ^ ^ O B M <-«* I I I 1,1 I I I I I I I II I I I I I I II I I I I i 111 i 11 u 11 m i m m u

in ai 7 o

TO U3-3 r» ai

TO TO *“>Oi O

to in

m '

X c H » *< O'

» 01 ^ 7 * ■3 b Q.

169

u 01 < » 01 0 rr .3” UiW’

o n M •o nn 7 in T x *o^j x z •wo z x *o^j x at at *o z *- 170 i B B Oi B a I I ccecc*ccc c c c cc t * > *o ► *o > ctj at > •o > *s >*s > •o > ctj at ►*o >*o 01*0 XXXXZ Z33VV^ 0* * W Mw KJ «U

Log ratio o

.

«*! 2 . " . o* ■ o* op op ro ro "— is is 2 o W M. n> “ ru ru ~ a> « a> in m •a

• i n i • m m m V OM i i i a a • •o •o'o ■a z ■a •o'o •o •O *M » M WUI h m I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

M M M * M M M I I I o. I I I L’S.Vi. O- L’S.Vi.

a rs I I Oi • • • — • • • Oi I I I I I II I I I II I II I I I Z 'T M M M I SSS 171 Q> Q> ft & M » * W MM * M * MM W * » M 1 I I i I I I I I I | | Z Z Z •OTJ Z Z ZT3 t3 rrrr'Mrrt-MM Ul K Ul I I I 1 a a

I I I I I I II I I II I I I I I I

11

I I I I S3S3?;:£2?€?5?£S£

2ZZZZ W ZZZZZW ^ U M Kt Kt M U w V**M M W

o O Log ratio 0_ 172 32 Lg ai darm oprn te otrna aa aaueet o pg ean fo acaooia sts sn te tnad bsd n h adr sals ra the? froa saaples aodern the on based standards the using sites archaeological froa reaains pig of aeasureaents aean postcranial the conparing diagram ratio Log 13.2:

p-7*-7~-sp£S?£s35:5;'VSST§si m JissS:5 = 2SSV»P i i i i i • 11 > i i i • i i «1 t i i t i • i i i i i i >i it it i r* i r* i onre wee ec acaooia st belongs site archaeological each where" countries

Qlz

O'

✓ \

O'

173 L

Vfl]0|«43*N|44f nilw ifArqsqjQ 1 ) 4 4 ) 4 0 i m r u i q r $ 4 C 4 j — urfl |[4j IMUMtl (4Q a«n qsog noqw unoatsI4§ i p i i q n s / r q t q a j •i«nj#5 4*4N i n X o n : r A r n Iflilj l(l»H Iflilj 404) inn^ itqguif 1419 4111)119 M*o, >|V !• WIU - qiiffl furg liqvqs p n p o r H*i ) 4 f c qriff )-o*4jnu Wtqtirc N*l *°*1 rarqai • IU04fU *49 »l vq«r«u49 iDunv

1 7 7 8. Discussion

In this chapter pig remains from 39 archaeological sites are considered, on the basis of results presented in the two previous chapters. The main aim of this research has been to survey as much late Pleistocene and early Holocene pig material in the Near

East as possible, in order to reconstruct a better picture of early pig domestication in this area. Each site was first examined individually and then the sites of the same period and same region were combined in order to obtain a large enough sample to be dealt with statistically. Pig remains from the same period and region were compared with their modern counterparts from the same region on the basis of the most useful discriminating measurements. The combinations used are as follows;

Regions coipared Levant (Israel+SW Syria) Zagros(Iran+Iraq) and Southeastern Central Anatolian Taurus (Turkey) Mountains Plateau BC BC BC

Periods cotpared IIP 50/40000 UP+Hes+Nat+PPNA 40/30000-7000 HGC(*)+IAC 10000-7250 PPNB 7000-5500 PVFC 7250-5750 PN+Later 5500-2000 DVFC 5750-3000 DVFC 5500

For the purpose of comparing pig remains from these periods with each other as well as with the modern wild pigs, both Simpson's

"log. ratio" technique and Penrose's "size" and "shape" statistic

and to test o\ s\c^rVv^\c.ance f pa.ramet.rvc i. test, were use<&.

Tables and furores ^ 6rv ^ , MB L show the results of the comparison of these combinations with the modern wild pigs from

(») Hunting-gathering conunities

178 the same regions; i.e - pig remains from Levant were compared with the modern wild pigs from Israel and pig remains from southern Taurus and Zagros region were compared with the modern wild pigs from Turkey+Iran+Iraq. Tables on Ito show the differences in pig remains from different periods of the same region. Table 55“ (pg-2.oo) gives the basic information used for the.

Penrose "size” and "shape" analysis. Standard deviations of

the population from Turkey+Iran+Iraq were used for the standard

deviation unit calculations. Figure it ^^-201} shows the

relationships of size and shape.

As can be seen on pa^es 13A,' 135^13*5 - and 2.00 ■./ pigs

are larger than the modern wild pigs of the region during the

Incipient Agriculture stage but they do not diverge in shape.

The picture starts to change at the beginning of the Primary

Village Farming stage, after ca 7250 BC. The earliest example of

this period is represented by the site of Cayonii in the

southeastern Taurus mountains of Turkey. Some examples of the

most reliable measurements (tooth widths) show that some Qayonu

pig dimensions are slightly smaller while the postcranial

dimensions are larger than those of their modern wild

counterparts (except for pelvis LAR). Coefficients of variation

for tooth widths are 4.0 - 8.6 and for postcranials are 6.6 - 8.7

( 126, 13 A V - Two of the tooth width dimensions are

significantly smaller; one is at the <0.01 level and the other at

the <0.05 level (' Here again, there is no shape

179 differences between the modern wild sample and Cayonu (3) (.pgs.200 and 201). The comparison of Qayonu pigs withthose from the

previous period also gives a similar picture; most tooth width

measurements of Qayonu pigs being smaller, while the postcranials

are larger ( . 185 /' 133 - 153, 201). ' -.

During the later stages of this period (between 7250-5750 BC)

which are represented by three sites, two being in the

Southeastern Taurus again, (Gritille and Hayaz) and one in the

Zagros (Jarmo), animals are significantly smaller than modern

wild pigs at the 0.01 level in most cases ("p^* 1 ££ ). They are

even smaller than the Cayonu pigs. Divergence in size is

considerable mainly on teeth measurements. There is a slight

divergence in shape as well ( p.qs-v 200 t tp 1 ) .

It The tables and figures indicate that pigs are even smaller

than both their modern counterparts i ( pcj. lTSXV and the

ones from the previous period, the Developed Village Farming

stage which starts at around 5750 BC ( 135 ). During this

period both size and the shape differences are more pronounced.

However, the situation at the Central Anatolian Plataeu during

this period is different. Pigs from the site of Erbaba, which

represents this period and is dated to ca. 5500 BC, are larger

than both the modern wild pigs and the Cayonu pigs (

ISA, 185, 135— 155).

180 The comparison of selected measurements of pig remains from the Middle Palaeolithic and Upper Palaeolithic+Mesolithic amd PP.IMA^ periods (ca. 50/40000-7000 BC) of the Levant region with those of the modern wild pigs from the same region shows that they are significantly larger than the modern animals.

Parametric t tests show that the differences for many dimensions are significant at the 0.01 level. Shape differences are noticable only in the postcranial measurements during the Middle

Palaeolithic 187, .154-201').

The situation is a little different in the period of PPNB. Tooth width measurements are either larger or are of similar size to the modern wild pigs or smaller. The postcranial measurements seem to be larger than those of the modern wild pigsy as is the case for Cayonu (pg. 187). Tak\e 54.4 (p^. 1881 compares the PPNB pigs with those of the previous period. As seen in the table most of the measurements are significantly smaller than the ones from the previous period. They do not diverge from the wild pigs from

Turkey+Iran+Iraq in shape (.p^s. zoo, zoiy. -

During the next period, namely Pottery Neolithic + Chalcolithic +

Early Bronze Age, tooth widths and the postcranial dimensions get much smaller than for the modern wild pigs and for the ones from the previous period (at the level of <0.01). There is also- some divergence in shape as well (pcjs. 187, 183, VJ4-201).

181 Under these circumstances it seems quite reasonable to suggest

that the domestication of this species started during the PVFC

period (7250-5750 BC in the Taurus+Zagros region. Perhaps it was

first initiated in the Southeastern Taurus during the early

stages of the PVFC period at the site of Cayonu, sometime between

7250-6750 fcC. figure VM^g.202l shows the gradual size decrease with

time. As seen in the figure, some of the Qayonu specimens are

within the domestic size range. However it must be borne in

mind that the differences between (Jayonu pigs and the modern wild

pigs from Turkey+Iran+Iraq and the pigs from the previous period

(IAC), are rather minor. Geographical variation might be

responsible for the size difference between Cayonu pigs and the

modern wild pigs, because the area is quite large. Some variation was seen within the same subspecies of modern wild pig, as stated

in Chapter V (see pg 108-109 ). £ay’on’u pigs seem smaller than the

pigs from the previous period (IAC) in most of the measurements.

However, the difficulty in drawing a firm conclusion is the small

size of the sample from the IAC period. Therefore, the

possibility that the first occurence of domestication was at

Cayonu must remain a tentative suggestion.

We have a clearer picture of domestication in this species from

two neighbouring sites a little later: Gritille and Hayaz at

around ca. 6250 BC. and at Jarmo (*) in the Zagros region at

around ca. 6000 BC (Flannery, 1983; Stampfli, 1983).

(*) Plannery and Staapfli suggest that the doaestic pigs appear only at the pottery-bearing upper levels of Jarao which are thought to fall closer to ca. 6000 BC (Flannery, 1961; Staapfli, 1983).It was not possible to aake this separation for the aaterial studied in this research, and the saail aniaals aay veil coae froa the pottery levels.

182 In the Levant, the comparison of modern wild pig with those from the PPNB period (7000-5500 BC) gives a similar picture to that of

Cayonu. The comparison of PPNB pigs with those from the UP+Mes+Nat+PPNA shows that the PPNB ones are smaller.

However, the solid evidence for domestication in this region comes from the Pottery Neolithic period onwards, after 5500 BC

( p^s. 137, 188, l U - 201). :

1B3

al 5.: oprsn f oe eetd esrmns f i rmis rm aiu acaooia sqecs se lo iue 15.1-11) figures also fsee sequences archaeological various from remains pig of measurements selected some of Comparison 54.3: Table

CjBP! sz

ZZZ k o a •> * m m o ■ mo ^ m *m^ i*

305* a » i-

o m

• • • t <

8 3 - 2. 2 *• a* * ^ » m ar U t lit ? «>S i ' s o a S • j o. 5 S 5 £

i

186

188 15.1* Comparative differences in soup selected pi9 measurements fron archaeological sitps studied in this research (see also Tables 54.1-5)

Suberde Erbaba/ S S 3 Developed FareingVillage Coaaunitiea ^ • firitille •Hayaz »Jarao a M 189 Prieary Village Faremg ioaeunities

D5 Cayonu mm r

Incipient Aorieultural Hunting-gathering*C o i m n i t i e s t

Log ratio jure 15.2: Comparative differences in soie selected pig eeasuresents fro* archaeological sites studied in this research (see also Tables 5s.1-5)

u. u Plateau (Turkey) I g K Erbaba/ P Developed ParsingVillage Coesunities ( S5 ** Suberde » r ilk s Jareo jc I Ir 190 Prisary Village Parsing Coesunities K Cayonu ^ • Sritille oHayaz fa e

Hunting-gathering^ Zagros (iran+traq) and Southern Taurus Mountains (Southeastern Turkey) • Coeiumties

S IncipientAgr\cv»ttu»aL rr

Log ratio re 15.3: Comparative differences in sooe selected pig measurements from aicfiaeoiogicai sites studied In this research (see also Tables trt.i-5)

° S u b w k t S 5 Erkata/ fievtiopttf Villagt fievtiopttf Faring Cooauoitm • fintillo o 191 Primary Villagi Parsing C o i M M t i H o o o o Log ratio 15.4: Coaparative differences in sooe selected pig leasureients iroe archaeological sites studied in this research (see also Tables 54.1-5)1

c Suiertfe S * Crkafca/ b j faramg faramg CoooMitm DerelopeO Village DerelopeO o • Sntille e Hiyil *Jirto 192 Ciyenii Prtiarv Village fining Coaaunitm a AgriculiuraL Huntiityfjtfcfring* IncigiMt IncigiMt 5 § fn— itiH

lo| ratio Figure 15.5: Conparative differences in soae selected pig Measurements fro* archaeological sites studied in this research (see also Tables 54.1-5)

SuOerde *5 Erbaha/ Plateau (Turkey) Central Anatolian r Developed TaraingVillage Coaaunities \ m 3 :Jarao • Sritille 0 May** 193 S 9 Cayoinu Prioary Village Faruing Coaaunities

Incipient AyicuUural Coaaunities Hunting-gathenng* lagros (IraneJraq) and Southern Taurus Mountains (Southeastern Turkey)

Log ratio Figure 15.6: Comparative differences in soae selected pig leasurements fron archaeological sites studied in this research (see also Tables 54.1-5)

•Pottery Neolithic a X3S Slater• Prepottery Neolithic I (PPNI) 194 r

} ^ Prepottery Neolithic A (PPM) a •NMoiithic * Natuliao ♦ u •Upper Palaeolithic* 4 a

Hit levant Palaeolithic fiddle

Log ratio 15.7: Co«parative differences in so*e selected pig Neasureients froe archaeological sites studied in this research (see also Tables 54.1-5)

later H: * lotteryH:* Neolithic frepottery Neolithic I 195 F A A (PPM)

PrepotteryNeolithic § e Mesolithic ♦ Natufiu ♦

« • Upper Palaeolithic* r

Palaeolithic Riddle

Log ratio ure 15.8: Comparative differences in soce selected pig leasureaents froi archaeological sites studied in this research (see also Tables 54.1-5)

~rs w> oPalterv w> NtoiUiui Slater • Prepcttery Neolithic I (PPMfi 196 ( P P M ) i 1 « ofcuiiUic Prepetterp♦ Natifiaa Neolithic♦ tt •Upper Palaeolithic* H a i

Log ratio ■o Hgure 15.^: lonparative differences in sone selected pig sieasureaents froi archaeological sites studied in this research (see also Tables 54. 1-5) c* Prepottery Neolithic I CPPH1) 197

Prepottery Neolithic A (PPM) eMesolithic ♦ Natufiae ♦ •Upper Palaeolithic* i Lo§ ratio 'O Figure 15.10: Comparative differences in some selected pig measurements from archaeological sites studied in this research fs®6 M l50 Tables 54.1-5)

• later• oPottery Neolithii 3

198 0 i

^ Prepottery Neolithic ! (PPNI) r ^ Prepottery Neolithic 0 (PP MO | oMesolithic * Natufiae * S Upper • Palaeolithic*

3* •he •he L m n t Palaeolithic

Middle 'CT

Log ratio 15.11: Comparative differences in soae selected pig aeasurements from archaeological sites studied in this research (see also Tables 54.1~5)

Pottery Neolithic •later Village Plateau (Turkey to Faraing Coaaunities Develop

Prepottery Neolithic I (PPND 199 „ Cavonu .. .. S S untino-gatnermg* Pmary Village faremo Coaaunities Coaaunities Incipient AyvcyLiural. Prepottery Neolithic A (PPMA) Tagros (Irantlraq) and Southern Taurus fountains (Southeastern Turiey) Cental Anatolian ohesolithic ♦ Natufiao a u! u! •Upper Palaeolithic*

Biddle palaeolithic

log ratio E lleasurenents Groups

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

14.42 15.14 14.71 13.14 11 .8 5 14.85 14.57 14.14 12.00 M-iWA 18.83 20.50 18.83 18.16 19.00 20 .1 6 19.83 18.66 17.16 ?i{w p 17.85 1 9.14 1 7 .4 2 1 6.42 14.71 18.42 17.42 17.14 15.85 h 2h a 1 9.12 21.12 1 9.37 17.87 16.50 20.12 19.75 19.62 17.62 2 3 . 0 0 2 4 . 1 4 2 2 . 8 5 2 0 .4 2 18 .8 5 24 .1 4 23.28 22.00 20.71 H s UA 1 8.30 19.41 18.73 17.72 15.91 19.45 19.36 17.63 1 7.24

D i s t a n c e s of the nodern wild pigs froii archaeological ones

1-■2 1--3 1--4 1--5 1-6 I*-7 1-8 1-9

S i ze -1.74 0.00 1.68 6.,28 -0.87 -0.06 0.15 4.16 S h a p e -0.17 0.08 0.42 1.43 -0.10 -0.26 0.19 0.39

Table 55.1 : Sone dental neasurenents expressed in standard deviation units and esiployed in the Penrose "size and shape* coaparisons distances obtained between the aodern wild pig saaple iron Turkey+lrantlraq in relation to the sanples iron various archaeological periods l.Turkey+Iran+Iraq; 2. I AC; 3.PVFC (Cayon'u); 4. PVFC (Gritille+Hayaz+Jarao); 5. DVFC; 6.HP; 7. UP+Hes*Natuf+PPNA; 8.PPNB; 5. PN

Heasureaents 6roup

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 3 9

H u i e r u s H C T 1 8 .1 6 19 .0 8 19 .2 5 18.16 16.41 2 0 . 2 5 18.50 18.91 16.08 U l na LPA 12.00 12.72 12 .2 8 11.20 10.00 11.32 1 2 .5 2 11.00 11.12 T i b i a B d P 16.90 17.05 18.00 17.25 15.95 1 8.50 1 5 . 7 5 1 6 .7 5 16.50 T i b i a Sfd 13.00 13.40 14.00 12.50 11.90 13.95 1 3 .0 0 13.05 12.20 A s t r a g a l u s 6L1 11.41 11.31 11 .9 7 11.00 10.60 12.63 1 1 .7 8 11 .4 8 11.17 A s t r a g a l u s LA 0 9 .7 1 10.20 10.46 9. 64 9.10 10.82 1 0 . 2 5 9 . 8 4 0 9 . 8 2

Distances of the aodern wild pigs froi archaeological ones

1-■2 1-3 1-4 1-5 1-6 1-7 1--8 1-9

S i ze -0. 21 -0 . 63 0 . 0 5 1.44 -1.09 - 0 . 0 7 0. 00 0.51 S h a p e -0. 08 -0 . 0 9 0 . 1 4 0 . 2 5 -0.74 -0.06 0.23 0 . 48

Table 55.2 : Gone posteranial neasurenents expressed in standard deviation units and enployed in the Penrose 'size and shape* coaparisons and distances obtained between the aodern wild pig saaple froi Turkey+Iran+Iraa in relation to the sanples froi various archaeological periods 1. Turkey+Iran+Iraq; 2. IAC; 2.PVFC (Cayonii); 4. PVFC (Gritille+Hayaz+Jarao); 5. DVFC; 6.HP; 7. U P + H e s * N a t u f * P P N A ; 8.PPNB; 9. P N

200 size

shape

Figure 16.1 : Size ana shaoe distances of various archaeological pig saioles froi the eoaern wild pigs froi Turkey+lran+iraq, using cranial data. Saaole fioures are oefineo in Table 55.1

size

shape

Figure 16.2 : Size and shaoe distances of various arcnaeoiogical pig saioles froi the eooern wild pigs froi Turkey*iran*iraq, using postcranial data. Saiole figures are defined in Table 55.1

201 □

14.0^

fix DD • ox 13.0. • XX X X • XX* X • $*•* • * o *x«x« o • x «xx* X ► XXX X * XX X XX X X * o x x«x *••• 12.0- x xoxx ooox •• XXIX* • ••• x„ • o••• o voo •• O X X xoo • X X *xo • o oxox •X* X , • O *000*0 11 0 o OCX3# . .. o . AAA «C> * 0 o 0 OO A r°°

10.0 - A A o

9 . Of -

8.0 1 I ,mva \ 8.0 9.0 1 0.0 11.0 12.0 1 3 . 0 H U P

Figure 17: Scatter diagraa of H1HA against MlWP froa pig reaains froa various periods

□ Incipient Agricultural Coaaunities • Priaary Village Faraing Coaaunities (Qayonti) O Priaary Village Faraing Coaaunities (Gritille UPPN+Hayaz+Jarao) A Developed Village Faraing Coaaunities X Modern wild pigs froa Turkey+Iran+Iraq

202 CHAPTER VII

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

The purpose of this research has been to shed light on the

question of the origin of pig domestication/ at least as regards

the Near East. To find out when and where the domestication of

this animal first occurred, whether theorigin of its

domestication was a single event occurring only in one region and

spreading from there to other regions, or whether it was an event

which occurred several times in several places in the world, is

clearly an interesting matter for debate. To be able to answer

these questions, a serious of modern samples of known age

and sex needed to be examined first. Possible reasons for size

variation had also to be investigated and a suitable methodology

devised and applied to archaeological samples.

In this study, a series of new measurements on a variety

of skeletal elements, as well as ones customarily taken were

employed in the analysis. Measurements were based on as large a

total sample as possible, over a wide geographic range and

an archaeological time span considred relevant to the problem.

Firstly, 348 modern wild pig skulls from the Hakel Game Research

area in Germany and 15 postcranial skeletons of modern wild pig

from Iran were examined, in order to evaluate within - population

variation and to elucidate good criteria for comparative

purposes. Secondly, values for different measurements on large

203 samples of 1 primitive domestic and 20 modern wild pig populations from various parts of the world were compared by means of common standards established on Hakel- and Iranian pigs, in order to evaluate the variation between populations. Thirdly, pig remains from 39 archaeological sites in the Near East were considered, in relation to the results on the modern wild samples. Each site was first examined individually and then the sites of the same period and same region were combined in order to obtain a large enough sample to be dealt with statistically. Pig remains from the same period and region were compared with their modern counterparts from the same region on the basis of the most useful discriminating measurements.

Metrical studies based on large modern wild pig samples from

Hakel in Germany and Iran, show that some measurements are more variable than others. As stated by Payne and Bull (1988), in order to separate larger wild from smaller domestic animals or to

investigate size changes between different periods, suitable measurements should ideally have low sexual dimorphism, low age-

related changes and low individual variability. Among the dimensions considered in this current research, tooth width measurements appear to be the most reliable. The investigation has shown that the most commonly used tooth length measurements are modified by attrition and thus change with age. They get smaller as the animals get older. Postcranial measurements, with

a few exceptions, are generally less useful because; a) there is

larger individual variability, b) there is greater sexual

204 dimorphisim and c) age-related variation is a problem as indicated by Payne and Bull (1988).

The examination of modern populations from various parts of the world shows that there is a range of variation in size between the samples of Sus scrofa. A number of the samples studied here were combined together on the basis of their size and shape similarity and ten groups were finally obtained. Values for some of the more reliable discriminant measurements (see pg. 69-70) of these ten groups were compared by means of common standards, based on measurements of the group from Turkey+Iran+Iraq.

One of these ten groups is Sus scrofa domesticus. a primitive domestic population from Ziguinchor in west Africa. This group is the smallest of all the samples studied here. Six subspecies of the remaining eight wild modern pig populations are smaller than our control group of Sus scrofa libvcus from Turkey+Iran+Iraq.

These are Sus scrofa alaira from Tunisia; Sus scrofa meridionalis from Italy and Spain; Sus scrofa scrofa from Austria, Germany,

Netherlands and France; Sus scrofa cristatus from India; Sus scrofa moupinensis from China and Sus scrofa vittatus from

Sumatra. Only one subspecies examined here is larger than Sus scrofa libvcus. that is Sus scrofa attila from Poland,

Czechoslovakia, Hungary and Romania. Sus scrofa sibiricus from

West Siberia does not seem to be much different from the Middle

Eastern counterparts ( 115, H O .

The classification of pigs used in this study is adopted from

205 Groves (1981). However, a few points need to be explained here.

According to Groves, Iraqi pigs belong to the subspecies of Sus scrofa attila but our analyses show that they are very much the same in size as the animals from Iran and Turkey,^ Sus scrofa

1ibvcus ' C pg- 105 )• The second point is that the modern wild pigs from Poland and Czechoslovakia are classified by Groves as members of the subspecies of Sus scrofa scrofa but this study shows that they are much larger than both Sus scrofa scrofa and

Sus scrofa libvcus. Therefore, they were grouped together with the samples from Hungary and Romania which are considered to belong to the subspecies of Sus scrofa attila by Groves

(1981), (see pgs.- 1051 12Q) . The final point is that there might be some differences within the same subspecies living in different environmental conditions. For example Sus scrofa libvcus from Israel is smaller than its cousins living in

Turkey+Iran + Iraq (p

105 It seems that the populations of the same subspecies

living in warmer regions are smaller than the ones living in colder regions.

Pig samples from several archaeological sites of different periods and regions were examined. Measurements which have low age- and sex-related variation and low individual variability were compared with both modern wild pig samples and pig remains

from different archaeological periods from the same region.

206 Comparisons enabled the following conclusions to be drawn:

Zaoros and Southeastern Taurus Mountains

10000 - 7250 BC Period of Hunting-gathering and Incipient Agriculture:

In the Zagros region incipient village assemblages are first seen at Karim Shahir in the‘Chemchemal Valley, Iraq (Braidwood and

Howe 1960; Howe, 1983); Zawi Chemi Shanidar in the Shanidar

Valley, Iraq (Solecki, 1964; 1981), at M'lefaat on the piedmont

near Mosul (Howe, 1983), at Asiab in the Kermanshah Valley, Iran

(Braidwood # V-Vo\we; et.aY. 1960; Braidwood, Howe and Reed, 1961; Howe,

1983). Both this study and the published results of some sites

which represent this period, such as Asiab (Bokonyi, 1977;

Flannery, 1983), and Zawi Chemi Shanidar (Perkins, 1964), show no

evidence of pig domestication in the region during this period.

7250-5750 BC Primary Village Farming Period

The picture starts to change at the beginning of the Primary

Village Farming stage. According to the results of this

investigation, it seems that the domesticated pig made its first

appearance during this period, sometime between 7250-6250 BC in

the Southeastern Taurus and Zagros region.It is possible that it

might have been first initiated during the early stages of this

period in the Southeastern Taurus region at the site of Cayonu

sometime around 7250-6750 BC. There are some indications that

small animals existed in the Cayonu population ( ,

207 184, aind ^ - Z02. *)* The reason for this change could not be age- or sex-related as the dimensions used for this comparison are not affected by age or sex. The differences can not be explained as a result of a climatic change, because palaeoenvironmental studies suggest that with the disappearance of the last Wurmian ice sheets, world climatic and environmental zones began to approach those of recent times

(Wright, Andrews and van Zeist, 1967).

Geographical variation and the small size of the sample from the previous IAC period might be responsible for the differences between the Cayonu pigs, modern wild pigs and the pigs from the previous period. But slightly higher coefficients of * variation and the occurrence of some small-sized animals within the Cayonu population itself might well be indicating some kind of human influence. However, this must remain a tentative suggestion until further studies at the site are completed.

We have far less evidence for really early village farming communities on the Anatolian and Iranian plateaus:

In Anatolia, the site of Suberde provides no evidence

of domestication (Bordaz, 1973). We know far too little of

basal Hacilar and £atal Hoyuk. A$ikli, another protoneolithic

site in Anatolia, has recently started to be excavated by

the Department of Prehistory, University of Istanbul.

Buitenhuis, who has undertaken the faunal analyses, says

that pig remains are very rare at the site and that there is

208 no sign of domestication (personal communication with

Buitenhuis, May 1990).

In Iran, Ganj Dareh in the Gamas Ab Valley - probably the

earliest available example for this period (see pg. 155)

does not produce any evidence for domestication and neither

does Tepe Guran in the Hulaila Valley (Mortensen, 1964).

Flannery says that quite a few pig remains represent wild

animals (Flannery, 1983). Pig remains from the site of Sarab

in the Kermanshah Valley are also very scanty and do not

provide any conclusive evidence for domestication. When we

move south towards the Deh Luran Plain on the steppe land

below the Zagros we have the site of Ali Kosh. Both this

present work and the previous studies do not show any

evidence for pig domestication at this site either (Flannery,

1983).

The solid evidence for the domestication of this animal comes from the two other slightly later sites in the Southern Taurus,

Gritille and Hayaz, ca.6250 BC (see ^ a

133 ^ .200 'and. 201V. The earliest evidence for domestic pigs in the Zagros is from the site of Jarmo in the Chemchemal Valley,

Iraq at about ca.6000 BC. These conclusions are compatible with those of the authors who have previously studied the faunal remains of these sites (Stein, 1986, 1987; Buitenhuis, 1985;

Flannery, 1983; Stampfli, 1983).

209 5750-2000 BC Developed Village Farming Period

Pigs from most of the sites which represent this period are domestic. Relevant sites are Kumartepe, Grik-i Haciyan (Mcardle,

1969) in the Southeastern Taurus; Gird Banahilk in the mountains of Iraqi Kurdistan, Matarrah, Choga Mami on the steppeland at the base of the Zagros in Iraq (Oates, 1969); Siahbid and Dehshavar in Kermanshah Valley, Iran, Tepe Sabz in the Deh Luran Plain, and

Hajji Firuz in the Solduz Valley, Iran. Another site which represents this period is Erbaba in the Central Anatolian

Plateau, although pig remains from this site (dated to ca. 5500

BC) do not appear to represent domestic animals.

The Levant and the Syrian Steppes:

When we move down to the Levant region, we generally meet a situation indicative of a scarcity of pig remains. Given the relatively inhospitable environment for pigs in this region, this is not surprising. However, having said this, we should not forget that it is an area with a mosaic of different habitats and the occurrence of pigs has varied greatly from one locality to another.

During the PPNB period of the Levant (ca.7000-5500 BC), the situation seems to be very similar to that of Cayonu. In general, pigs from the PPNB seem to be smaller than the ones from the previous period. However, climatic factors might have influenced body size here as most of the material from the previous period

210 comes from the Upper Palaeolithic. In the long and complex sequence of Israel, solid evidence for domestic pigs come from the begining of the PN period (ca.5500 BC) onwards, but there is little of it. Due to the nature of the environmental conditions pig keeping never became an important part of the subsistence pattern in this region. Moving north to Lebanon we encounter the site of Labweh in the Beka'a Valley during ca. 6000-5750 BC

According to Bokonyi domestic pigs are present at this site, representing about 1% of the fauna (Bokonyi, 1978). Further north we have the Amuq Plain in southeastern Anatolia, where the domestication was under way shortly after 6000 BC. The relatively late appearance of domestic pigs in Israel might be explained as due to the influence of earlier centers of pig domestication, such as in the Beka'a Valley (Labweh) and on the plain of

Antioch (Amuq). When we move towards northeastern Syria we have the site of Umm Quesir (ca. 4800 BC). Dimensions of the pig remains from the site show that the animals were domestic.

Domestic pigs are reported in Southeastern Europe almost as early as they are in the Near East. Pig remains from the

Prepottery Neolithic site of Argissa Magula in Thessaly,

Greece (7/6th millenium BC) have been identified as

domestic on the basis of their small size (Boessneck, 1962).

Again the pigs from the Neolithic site of Nea Nikomedeia in

Macedonia, Greece (6250 BC) are reported to be domestic

(Rodden, 1962). Here, the size of the M^ and the abundance of the

juveniles in the sample have been used as evidence for domestication.

211 Davis reports that the pigs from the two Cypriot Prepottery

Neolithic sites (6000-5000 BC) of Cape Andreas Kastros and

Khirokitia, are smaller than modern, early Holocene or late

Pleistocene wild pigs from the Near East. He suggests that this size difference, together with the presence of pigs on the island, argue for the domestic status of the pig in the

Mediterranean in the 6th millennium BC (Davis, 1984; 1989).

However, he points out that the teeth measurements are smaller than teeth from the 7th millennium BC sites, but larger than the teeth from the 5th and 4th millennia BC sites. Therefore he thinks that the Cypriot Neolithic pig was probably derived from a relatively large "primitive” breed of Near Eastern pig which subsequently underwent further reduction in size on the mainland.

According to Chow Ben Shun, available archaeological evidence has shown that the pig was one of the first animals to be domesticated in prehistoric China (Chow Ben Shun, 1984). On the basis of ageing analyses, the early Neolithic site of Zhen-Pi

Yan in South China is accepted as giving thefirst evidence of the domestication of this animal in the 7th millenium BC (Li

Youheng, 1981). Domestic pigs in North China are dated to a little later date than in South China. Chow Ben Shun says that the earliest Neolithic culture so far discovered in North China is ,fCishan-Pei-1 i-kangM culture of which the dates are about

5900-5400 BC and that the remains of domestic pigs have been recovered from the sites which represent this culture. However, he does not give solid evidence for its domestication. He mainly

212 uses the pottery sculpture in the shape of a pig's head

unearthed from Pei-li-kang as a proof of existence of domestic

pigs (Chow Ben Shun, 1984). It would be useful to examine in

detail large samples from archaeological sites in China in order

to provide answers to the questions regarding the ancestory of

the domestic pig in China.

In the light of this variety of evidence, it would be a mistake

to see the origin of pig domestication as a single event

occurring in one area and spreading from there to other regions;

as they appear to be domestic in different parts of the Old World

during more or less the same period. Rather, as some authors have

stated (Bokonyi, 1974; Flannery, 1983), there appears to have

been several areas in which there was independent early pig

domestication. However, the knowledge of techniques of

domestication and in some cases the introduction of actual

animals must have played a part in the spread of pigs in the same

area to neighbouring regions in later periods. Southeast Europe,

the Southeastern Taurus and Zagros Mountains and perhaps

Southeastern Asia were probably the three earliest centers of pig

domestication, each indigenous sub-species providing independent

lines of domestication from the 7th millenium BC.

Finally, the results of this current research draws special attention to the Southeastern Taurus center, as it provides the

earliest evidence for domestication. This could have been

initiated in the locality which encompasses the Cayonu people

around 6750 BC., and certainly the Gritille and Hayaz people

around 6250 BC.

213 ACKNOWLEDEGEMENTS

I am deeply indebted to many people for their aid and advice which has enabled me to write this thesis.

This study was conducted under the supervision of Don Brothwell and Prof. D.R. Harris. I thank them very much for their patient and critical reading of the manuscript at various stages. I must express my thanks to Dr. R.Meadow for his help at the earlier stages of this work and for making it possible for me to work on

Erbaba/Suberde material in his Lab, in the Peabody Museum,

Harvard University. My deepest thanks go to Dr. S.Payne who shared his great knowledge and experience with me throughout this study. Without his generous help this research would not have been possible.

I am deeply grateful to all who allowed me to study the many

important collections used in this work and to all who kindly made the facilities available. In particular, I must thank

Dr. Angermann, Dr.A.Azzaroli, Prof.Dr.J.Boessneck, Dr.P.J.H.von

Bree, Ms.T.Dayan, Prof.Dr.A.von den Driesch, Dr.G.Heidemann,

Dr.D.Heinrich, Prof.Dr.D.Kruska, Dr.E.Pucher, Dr.H.Reichstein,

Dr.T.Shariv, Dr.C.Smeenk, Dr.M.Teichert, Dr.L.Stubbe,

Prof.Dr.M.Stubbe, Prof.Dr. H-P.Uerpmann, Dr.L.H.van Wijngaarden-

Bakker.

I extend hearty thanks to Dr.J.Clutton-Brock, Dr.H.Buitenhuis,

Dr . A.T.Clason, Dr.P.Ducos, Ms.L.K.Horwitz, M s . A.Kersten, Prof.

214 Or.C.A.Reed, Dr.J.Roodenberg, Prof.Dr.E.Tchernov, Mr.G.Stein,

Ms .P. Wattenmaker, Dr.M.Zeder. for their permission to re-study

the material published by them, for their generous hospitality and for their very friendly help in every way.

This study was supported by the British Council, the Association

of Cultural Exchange, the Central Research Fund, the Gordon

Childe Fund and the Cayonu Project with the contribution of

private donations from Ms.B.Lawrence Mrs.J.F.Lawrence, Dr.J.Page,

Mrs.J.A.Friendly. I would like to express my deep gratitude to

these institutions and persons. Without their help this work

could not possibly have been completed.

A special note of appreciation is due to Mr.J.Watson for his

friendly help ai the beginning of this work.

I must express my very special thanks to Ms.B.Lawrence and to

Prof.Dr.R.J.Braidwood and Mrs.L.S.Braidwood. To me they have been

a continuing sourde of encouragement, good advice, help in every

way, from my beginnings in archaeozoology onwards.

Finally, my deep personal gratitude is due to my long suffering

husband Ates Dogan. This thesis simply would not have been % completed without his very patient support and help over the last

five years.

Oviously, the final responsibility for the contents rests with

the author.

215 BIBLIOGRAPHY

Ainsworth, W.F., 1838. Researches in Assyria. Babylonia, and Chaldea. John W. Parker, London.

Angress, S., I960. "The Pig Skeleton from Area B, in Yadin, Yigal". Hazor II: 169.

Bar-Yosef,0., Gopher, A., and Goring-Morris, A.N., 1980. "Netiv Hagdud, a Sultanian Mound in the Lower Jordan Valley". Paleorient 6 : 201-206.

Beaux, 0. and Festa, E., 1927. "La ricomparse del Cinghiale nell'Italia settentrionale- occidentale". Memorie della Societa Italiana di Scienze Naturali e del Museocivico di Storia Naturale di Milano 9: 265-324.

Belie, J., 1938. "Die Abstammung des Balkanwildschweines". Zeitschrift fur Zuchtuno. B: Tierzuchtuno und Zuchtunasbioloaie 42: 151- 214.

Berry, R.J., 1969. "The General Implications of Domestication in Animals". In: Ucko, P.J. and Dimbleby, G.W.,(eds). Domestication and Exploitation of Plants and Animals: 207-217. Duckworth, London.

Blanford, W.T., 1891. The Fauna of British India. including Cevlon and Burma: Mammalia. Taylor and Francis,London.

Bodenheimer, F.S., 1958. "The Present Taxonomic Status of the Terrestrial Mammals of Palestine". Bulletin of the Research Council of Israel Section B: 165-190.

Boessneck, J., 1962. "Die Tierreste aus der Argissa-Magula vom prakeramischen Neolithikum bis zur mittleren Bronzezeit". In: Boessneck, J. and Hopf, M. (eds). Die deutschen Ausorabunaen auf der

216 Arqissa-Maaula in Thessallen I: 27-99. Beitrage zur ur-und fruhgeschlchtelichen Archaologie des Mittelmeer- Kulturraumes 2, Habelt, Bonn.

Bokonyi, S., 1974. History of Domestic Mammals in Central and Eastern Europe. Akademiai Kiado, Budapest.

Bokonyi, S., 1977. The Animal Remains from four Sites in Kermanshah Valiev. Iran- Asiab. Sarab. Dehshavar and Siahbid: the faunal Evolution. Environmental Changes and Development o£.Anlmal. Husbandry VIII-III millennia BC. British Archaeological Reports International Series 34, Oxlord.

Bokonyi, S., 1978. "Environmental and cultural differences as reflected in the animal bone samples from five early Neolithic sites in Southwest Asia". In: Meadow, R. H. and Zeder, M. A. (eds). Approaches to faunal analysis in the Middle East: 57-62. Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology, Harvard University, Bulletin 2/ Cambridge, Mass.

Bokonyi, S., 1983. "Domestication, Dispersal and Use of Animals in Europe". World Animal Science 1: 1-20.

Bordaz, J., 1973. "Current research in the Neolithic of Southcentral Turkey: Suberde, Erbaba and their Chronological Implications". American Journal of Archeology 77: 282-288.

Braidwood, R.J., 1960. "Seeking the World's First Farmers in Persian Kurdistan: A Full Scale Investigation of Prehistoric Sites near Kermanshah". The Illustrated London News Oct. 22: 695-697.

Braidwood, R.J., 1962. "Southwestern Asia beyond the Lands of the Mediterranean Littoral". In: Braidwood, R.J. and Willey, G.R. (eds;. Courses toward Urban Life: 132-146. Aldine Press> Chicago.

Braidwood, R.J., 1983. "Jarmo Chronology". In: Braidwood, L.S., Braidwood, R.J,Howe,B., Reed, C.A. and Watson, P.J. (eds). Prehistoric Archaeology Along the Zagros Flanks: 537-540. Oriental

217 Institute Publications 105, University of Chicago Press, C h i c a g o .

Braidwood, R.J., 1986. "The Origin and Growth of a Research Focus: Agricultural Beginnings". Exped i t i on 28/2: 2-7.

Braidwood, R.J., Braidwood, L.S. el. al- J 1 5 5 2 . "Matarrah: a Southern Variant of the Hassunian Assemblage, excavated in 1948".Journal of Near Eastern Studies 11: 1-75.

Braidwood, R.J. Howe, B. and et al., 1960. Prehistoric Investigations in Iraqi Kurdistan. Studies in Ancient Oriental Civilisation 31. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

Braidwood, L.S. and Braidwood, R.J., 1960. "Relative Chronology and Interpretation". In: Braidwood,R .J . and Braidwood, L.S. (eds). Excavations in the Plain of Antioch I: the Earlier Assemblages. Phase A-J. Oriental Institute'Publications 61, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

Braidwood, R.J., Howe, B. and Reed, C.A., 1961. "The Iranian Prehistoric Project". Science 133: 2008-2010.

Briedermann,L., 1965* Die Altersbestimmune erleaten SchwarzwiIdes. Deutsche Akademie de Landwirtschaftswissenschaften zu Berlin. Arbeitsgemeinschaft fur Jaad-und Wi Idforschung. Merkblatt 22. Berlin. .

Brunderink, G.G., 1977. "Maaginhoudonderzoek van het Wilde Zwijn (Sus scrofa Linnaeus, 1758) op de Veluwe". Lutra 19/3: 72-85.

Buitenhuis, H., 1985. "Preliminary Report on the Faunal Remains of Hayaz Hoyuk from the 1979-1983 Seasons". Anatolica XII: 61-74.

Bull, G. and S. Payne, 1982. "Tooth Eruption and Epiphysial Fusion in Pigs and Wild Boar". In:WiIson,B., Grigson, C. and Payne, S., (eds). Ageing and Sexing Animal Bones from Archaeological Sites: 55-71. British Archaeological Reports British Series 109 O x f o r d . 7

21$ Cauvin, J ., 1972 . "Nouvelles Fouilles de Tell Mureybet, Syrie- 1971-1972". Annales Archeoloaiqes Arabes Svriennes 22/105:15.

Cauvin, J ., 1975. "Les Origiens de la vie sedentaire: le village de Mureybet". La Recherche 4/39: 1008-1009.

Cauvin, J., 1978a. "Les fouilles de Mureybet (1971-1974) et leur Signification pour les Origines de la Sedentarisation au Proche-Orient". Annual of the American Schools of Oriental Research 44: 19- 48 .

Cauvin, J., 1978b. "Les Premieres Villages de Syria-Palestine du IXeme au Vlleme Mille'nnaire avant J.C". Maison de l'Orient Mediterranean Ancien 4. serie archeologique 3, Lyon.

Cheesman, R.E., 1920. "Report on the Mammals of Mesopotamia Collected by Members of the Mesopotamian Expeditionary Force, 1915-1919". Journal of the Bombay Natural History Society. 27: 323-346.

Chow Ben-Shun, 1984.

"Animal Domestication in Neolithic China". In: Clutton- Brock, J. and Grigson, C. (eds). Animals and Archaeology 3: Early Herders and their Flocks: 363-369. British Archaeological Reports International Series, 202, Oxford.

Clutton-Brock, J., 1971. "The Primary Food Animals of the Jericho Tell from the Proto-Neolithic to the Byzantine Period". Levant 3: 41-55.

Clutton-Brock, J., 1979. "The Mammalian Remains from the Jericho Tell". Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 45: 135-157.

21S Corbet, G.B., 1978. The Mammals of the Palaearctic Region: A Taxonomic Review. British Museum (Natural History), London.

Daly, P., 1970. Suberde and Erbaba: An examination of faunal reports as related to economic patterns. Unpublished manuscript, H a r w a r d .

Davis, S.J.M., 1974. "Animal Remains from the Kebaran Site of Ein Gev I, Jordan Valley, Israel". Paleor ient 2: 453-462.

Davis, S.J.M., 1981. "The Effects of Temperature Change and Domestication on the Body Size of Late Pleistocene to Holocene Mammals of Israel". Paleobiology 7: 101-114.

Davis, S.J.M., 1982. "Climate Change and the Advent of Domestication; the Succession of Ruminant Artiodactyls in the Late Pleistocene- Holocene in the Israel Region" .Paleobiology 8/1: 5-15.

Davis, S.J.M., 1984. "Khirokitia and its mammalian remains - a Neolithic Noah's ark" In: Le Brun, A. (ed). Fouilles recentes a Khirokitia (Chvpre). 1977-1981: 147-162.

Davis. S.J.M., 1985. "A Preliminary Report of the Fauna from Hatoula: a Natufian- Khiamian (PPNA) Site near Latroun, Israel".In: Lechevallier P.M and Ronen, A. (eds). Le Site Natoufien-Khiamien de Hatoula. pres de Latroun. Israel Fouilles 1980-1982 Rapport Pelimina ire 1: 71-98. Centre de Recherche Francais de Jerusalem, Jerusalem.

Davis, S.J.M., 1989. "Some more animal remains from the Aceramic Neolithic of Cyprus" In: Le Brun, A. (ed). Fouilles recentes a Khirokitia (Chvpre). 1983-1986: 190-221.

220 Dolfus, G. and Lecheval1ier, M., 1969. "Les deux premieres campagnes de fouilles a Abou Gosh (19 6 7— 1968)". Syria 46: 277-292. van den Driesch, A., 1976. A Guide to the Measurement of Animal Bones from Archaeological Sites. Peabody Museum Bulletin 1, Harvard.

Ducos, P., 1968. L'orioine des animaux domestioues en Palestine. Publication de l’Institute de Prehistoire de 1 ’Universite" de Bordeaux Memoire 6, Bordeaux.

Ducos, P., 1975. "The Oriental Institute Excavations at Mureybet, Syria: Preliminary Report on the 1965 Campaign, Part IV: les Restes de Petits Ruminants et de Suides". Journal of Near Eastern Studies 34/3: 191-199.

Ducos, P., 1978. Tell-Murevbet Etude Archeozoologiaue et Problemes d'ecolooie Humaine 1. Centre National de La Recherche Scientifique Centre, Paris.

Ellis, R.S. and Voigt, M.M., 1982. "1981 Excavations at Gritille, Turkey". American Journal of Archaeology 86: 319-332.

Ewing, J.F., 1947. "Preliminary Note on the Excavations at the Paleolithic site of Ksar'Akil, Republic of Lebanon". Antiauitv 21: 186-196.

Flannery, K.V., 1961. Skeletal and Radiocarbon Evidence for the Origins of Pig Domestication. MA Thesis, Dept, of Anthropology, University of Chicago.

Flannery, K.V., 1983. "Early Pig Domestication in the Fertile Crescent: a Retrospective Look". In: Braidwood, R. J.(ed). The Hilly Flanks and Beyond: Essays on the Prehistory, of Southwestern Asia Presented to R. J. Braidwood. Studies in Ancient Oriental Civilisation 36: 163-188. Oriental Institute PresSj Chicago.

221 Foster, J.B., 1964. "Evolution of Mammals on Islands". Nature London 202: 234- 2 3 5 .

Fradrich, M., 1974. " A Comparison of behaviour in the Suidae". International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources 1/24: 133-144.

Fredeen, H.T., 1972. "Factors Influencing Genetic Gain". In: Cole, D.J.A., (ed), Pig Production: 3-19. Butterworth, London.

Galili, E., 1987. "A Late Pre-Pottery Neolithic B Site from the Sea Floor at Atlit". Mitekufat Haeven 20: 35-37.

Galili, E. and We instein-Evron, M., 1985. "Prehistory and Palaeoenvironments of Submerged Sites along the Carmel Coast of Israel". Paleorient 11/1: 37-52.

Garfinkel, Y., 1985. "A Preliminary Report on the Excavation of Neolithic Layers at Yiftahel, Area C". Mitekufat Haeven 18: 45-51.

Garstang, J. and Garstang, J.B.E, 1947. The Story of Jericho. Marshall, Morgan and Scott, London.

Gopher, A., 1985. Flint Tool Industries of the Neolithic Period in Israel. Ph.D. dissertation, Hebrew University, Jerusalem.

Groves, C ., 19 81. Ancestors for the Pigs: Taxonomy and Phvloaenv of the Genus Sus. Technical Bulletin 6, Australian National University.

Habermehl, K.H., 1975. Die Altersbestimmung bei Haus-und Labortieren. 2 Auflage, Verlag Paul Parey, Berlin.

Hammond, J., 1965. Farm Animals. (3rd ed. reprint): Edward Arnold, London.

Hart, H.C., 1891. "Some Account of the Fauna and Flora of Sinai, Petra and Wadi1Arabah". Palestine Exploration Fund. Mammals: 233-238.

222 Hatt, R.T., 1959. The Mammals of Iraq. Miscellaneus Publications Museum of Zoology of University of Michigan 106, Michigan.

Hemmer, H., 19 78. "Oeographische Variation der Hirngrosse in Sus scrofa und Sus verrucosus Kreis (Beitrag zur Problem der Schweindomestikation)". Spixiana 1: 309-320.

Hesse, B., 1977. Evidence for Husbandry from the Earlv Neolithic Site of Gani Dareh in Western Iran. Ph.D. dissertation, Columbia University, New York.

Higgs, E.S. and Jarman, M.R., 1972. "The Origins of Animal and Plant Husbandry". In: Higgs, E.S., (ed), Papers in Economic Prehistory: 3-13, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Hole, F., Flannery, K. and Neely, J., 1969. Prehistory and Human Ecology of the Deh Luran Plain: An Earlv Village Sequence from Khuzistan. Iran. Memoirs of the Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan I, Michigan.

Hooijer, D.A., 1961. "The Fossil Vertebrates of Ksar'7dcil, a Palaeolithic Rock Shelter in Lebanon". Zooloqische Verhandelinaen 49: 1-67.

Horvitz, L.K., 1937a. "The Fauna from the PPNB Site of Yiftahel: New Perspectives on Domestication". Mitekufat Haeven 20: 181-182.

Horwitz, L.K., 19 87b. "Animal Remains from the Pottery Neolithic Levels at Tell Dan". Mitekufat Haeven 20: 114-118.

Horwitz, L.K., (1987c). "Bone Remains from Neve Yam, A Pottery Neolithic Site off the Carmel Coast". Mitekufat Haeven 21: 99-103.

Horvitz, T,. K . and Tchernov, E., 1987. "Faunal Remains from the PPNB Submerged Site of Atlit". Mitekufat Haeven 20: 72-78.

Ill H o w e , B . , 1 9 8 3. "Karim Shahir". In: Braidwood, L.S., Braidwood, R.J,Howe,B., Reed, C.A. and Watson, P.J. (eds), Prehistoric Archaeology Along the Zagros Flanks: 23-154. Oriental Institute Publications 105, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

Howe, T.D. and Bratton, S.P., 1976. "Winter Rooting Activity of the European Wild Boar in the Great Smokey Mountains National Park". Castanea 41/3: 256- 2 6 4 .

Isaac, E., 1970. Geography of Domestication. Englewood Cliffs, New J e r s e y .

Jarman, M.R. and Wilkinson, P.F., 1972. "Criteria of Animal Domestication". In Higgs, E.S., (ed). Papers in Economic Prehistory: 83-96. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Kelm, H., 1939. "Zur Systematik der Wildschweine". Zeitschrift fur Tierzuchtung und Zuchtungsbiologie 43: 363-369.

Kenyon, K.M., 1981. Excavations at Jericho III: The Architecture and Stratigraphy of the Tell. Oxford University Press, Oxford.

(ersten, A.M.P., 1989. "The Epipaleolithic Ungulate Remains from Ksar'Akil: Some Preliminary Results". British Archaeological Reports International Series 508, 183-198.

Cinnear, N.B., 1916. Notes on the Animals of Mesopotamia. Bombay Natural History Socciety, Special Publications, Bombay. fumerlove, H., 1975. "Die Saugetiere (Mammalia) der Turkei". Zoologischen Staatssammlung 18: 69-158.

Laffer, J.P., 1983. "The Faunal Remains from Banahilk". In: Braidwood, L.S.,

12k Laffer, J.P., 1983. "The Faunal Remains from Banahilk”. In: Braidwood, L.S., Braidwood, R.J, Howe,B., Reed, C.A. and Watson, P.J. (eds), Prehistoric Archaeology Along the Zagros Flanks: 629-649. Oriental Institute Publications 105, University of Chicago Press, Chicago. jamdan, M. and Davis, M ., 1983. "Le Site de Yiftahel,Israel". L'Anthropologie 87: 273-274

1 a u we r i e r , C . G . M . , 1 9 8 3 "Pigs, Piglets and Determining the Season of Slaughtering". Journal of Archaeological Science 10: 483-488.

Iawrence, B., 1980. "Evidences of Animal Domestication at £ayonii". In: Qambel, H. and Braidwood,R .J . (eds). The Joint Istanbul-Chicago Universities' Prehistoric Research in Southeastern Anatolia I, 285-308. Edebiyat Fakultesi Basimevi, Istanbul.

Iawrence, B., 1982. "Principle Food Animals at Cayonii". In Braidwood, R.J. and Braidwood, L. S. (eds). Prehistoric Village Archaeology in Southeastern Turkey: 175-199. British Archaeological Reports International Series 138, Oxford.

Lay, D.M., 1967 . "A Study of the Mammals of Iran Resulting from the Street Expedition of 1962-1963". Fieldiana Zoology 54 : 262-263.

Licheva11ier, M., 1978. Abou Gosh et Beisamoun. deux gisements du VII millennaire avant l'ere chretienne en Israel. Memoire et Travaux du Centre de Recherches Prehistoriques Francais de Jerusalem 2. Association Paleorient, Paris. v«n Loon, M. , 1968 . "The Oriental Institute Excavations at Mureybet, Syria: Preliminary Report on the 1965 Campaign. Part I: Architecture and General Finds". Journal of Near Eastern Studies 27/4: 265-289.

Ly3ekker, R., 1915. Catalogue of Ungulate Mammals in the British Museum vol.4. British Museum (Natural History) Trustees, London. -lack in, R . , 1970. "Dynamics of Damage Caused by Wild Boar to Different Agricultural Crops". Acta Theriologica. 15: 447-458. latschke, G.H., 1967. "Ageing European Wild Hogs by Dentition". Journal of Wildlife Management 31: 109-113.

I a y r , E . , 1 9 6 3 . Animal Species and Evolution. Belknap Press, Cambridge M a s s . icArdle, J.E., 1969. A Numerical (Computerized) tiethod for Quantifying Zooarchaeological Comparisons. Unpublished Masters thesis. University of Illinois, Chicago. feadow, R.H., 1983. "The Vertebrate Faunal Remains from Hasanlu Period X at Hajji Firuz" in Voigt, M.M. (ed), Hasanlu Excavation Reports Volume I: Haiii Firuz Tepe. Iran: The Neolithic Settlement: 370-422. University Museum Monograph 50, University Museum Publication, Philadelphia. tetaxas, C.C., 1891. "Memoire sur les animaux de la Mesopotamie". Revue des Sciences Naturelles: 219-223.

Mitzger, M.M., 1986. Ain Ghazal. Preliminary Faunal Report: Sus. Unpublished manuscript, Chicago.

Mrtensen, P., 1964. "Early village-farming occupation. Excavations at Tepe Guran, Luristan". Acta Archaeologica 34: 110-121.

Mirphy, J.W., 1939. "Ksar'Akil, Boston College Expedition". Anthropological Series. Boston College Graduate School 3/1: 272-275. vcn Nathusius, H., 1864. Vorstudien fur Geschichte und Zucht der Haustiere Zunachst am Schweineschade1, Berlin.

i n Nehring, A., 1888. "Uber die Form der unteren Eckzahn bei den Wildschweinen, sowie uber das sog. Torfschwein (Sus palustris Rutimever)". Sitzungsberichte der Gesellschaft der___ NafruKfgrschentisr Freunde in Berlin: 9-16.

Neuville, R., 1929. "Additions a la list des. stations prehistoriques de Palestine et Transjordanie". Journal of the Palestine Oriental Society 9: 114-121.

Neuville, R., 1934. "Le Prehistorique de Palestine". Revue Bibliaue 43: 237-259.

Noy, T., Legge, A.J. and Higgs,E.S., 1973- "Recent Excavations at Nahal Oren, Israel". Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 39 : 75-99.

Oates, J., 1969- "Choga Mami 1967-68: a preliminary report".Iraq 31(2): 115- 152.

Ozdogan, M. and Ozdogan A., (1585). "Cayonii. A Conspectus of Recent Work 'V - Paleorienfr 15/1 ; * 5 - 7 5 . '

Payne, S., 1972. "On interpretation of bone samples from archaeological sites": In Higgs, E.S. (ed). Papers in Economic Prehistory 65-81. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Payne, S. and Bull, G., 1988. "Components of variation in measurements of pig bones and teeth and the use of measurements to distinguish wild from domestic pig remains" Archaeozooloqia II/1-2: 27-66.

Penrose, L.S., 1954. "Distance, size and shape". Annals of Eugenics 18: 337-343.

Perkins, D., 1964. "Prehistoric fauna from Shanidar Cave, Iraq". Science 144: 1565-1566.

227 ferkins, 0. and Daly, P., 1968. "A hunter's village in Neolithic Turkey”. Scientific American 219 /5: 96-106. ferrot, J., 1963. ”Hotvat Minhah (Munhatta)”. Israel Exploration Journal 13/2: 139.

Brrot, J., 1965. ”Munhatta". Israel. Exploration Journal 15: 248-249.

Brrot, J., 1966. "Munhatta (Kh. Minha)". Israel Exploration Journal 16: 269-272.

Rrrot, J., 1967. "Munhatta (Kh. Minha)". Israel Exploration Journal 17: 267-268.

Prrot, J., 1969. "Abou Gosh". Israel Exploration Journal 19/2: 115-116.

Pne, D.S. and Gerdes, G.L., 1973. "Wild Pigs in Monterey County, California". California Fish and Game 59: 126-137.

Pra, A., 1909. "Studien zur Geschichte der Schweinerassen, insbesondere derjenigen Schwedens". Zooloqischer Jahrbuch Supplement 10/2: 223-224.

Ptman, C.R.S., 1922. "Notes on Mesopotamian Mammals", looms! tKe Bombay Natural History Society 28: 474-480.

Pausnitz, M. W. and Wreschner, E.E., 1971. "Neve Yam, a Submerged Neolithic Settlement". Qadmoniot 4: 120-121.

Red, C.A., 1959. "Animal Domestication in the Prehistoric Near East". Science 130/3389: 1629-1639.

228 Reed, C.A., 1961. "Osteological Evidences for Prehistoric Domestication in Southwestern Asia". Zeitschrift fur Tierzuchtung und Zuchtunasbi ologie 76: 31-38.

Reed, C.A., 1969. "The Pattern of Animal Domestication in the Prehistoric Near East". In: Ucko, P. J. and Dimbleby, G.W. (eds), The Domestication and Exploitation of Plants and Animals: 361- 380., Aldine Publishing Co., Chicago.

Sodden, R., 1962. "Excavations at the early Neolithic site at Nea Nikomedeia", Greek Macedonia (1961 season). Proceeding of the Prehistoric Society 28: 271-274.

lollefson, G. 1984. "Ain Ghazal: An Early Neolithic Community in Highland Jordan, Near Amman". Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 255: 3-14.

lollefson, G. (in press)* "The Neolithic Village of Ain Ghazal, Jordan: Preliminary Report on the 1984 Season". Submitted to Bulletin of the American School of Oriental Research Supplement.

Follefson, G., Banning, E., Byrd, B. and et a l ., 1984 . "Excavations at the PPNB Village of Ain Ghazal (Jordan) 1 9 8 2". Mitteilungen der Deutschen Orient Geseelshaft 116: 1 3 9 - 1 8 3 .

RDllefson, G. and Simons, A., 1985. "The Early Neolithic Village of Ain Ghazal, Jordan: Preliminary Report on the 1980 Season". Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research Supplement 23: 35-52.

R d Heston, G., 1877- "On the Domestic Pig of Prehistoric times in Britain and on the Mutual Relations of this Variety of Pig and Sus scrofa ferus. Sus cristatus. Sus andamansis and Sus barbatus". Transactions of the Linnean Society of London 1: 251-286.

R«odenberg, J.J., 1980.. "Premiers resultats des recherches archeologiques a Hayaz Hoyuk", Ana^oVica V I I : 3 - 11.

223 Roodenberg, J.J., 1982. "Note sur la troisieme campage de fouilles a Hayaz Hoyiik". Anatolica IX: 27-31.

Roodenberg, J.J., Wilkinson, T.J. and Bayri-Baykan, S., 1984. "Surveys and Soundings at Kumartepe: An Interim Report". Anatolica XI: 1-13.

Rutimeyer, L., 1861. "Die Fauna der Pfahlbauten der Schweiz". Neue_Denkschriften — Schweizer Gesellschaft der Naturwissenschaft Zurich 19: 1-248.

Sanborn, C.C., 1940. "Mammals from Iraq".In: Field, H., (ed). The Anthropology of Iraq 1/1: 156-162: Field Museum Natural History Publications 30, Chicago.

Schick. T. and Stekel/s, M., 1977. "Mousterian Assemblages in Kebara Cave, Mount Carmel". In: Arensburg, B. and Bar-Yosef, 0. (eds.). Eretz-lsrael 13: 97-103. Israel Exploration Society, Jeruselam.

Silver, I.A., 1969. "The Ageing of Domestic Animals". In: Brothwell, D. and Higgs, E.S.(eds), Science in Archaeology; 283-302. Thames and Hudson, London.

Simpson, G.G., 1941. "Explanation of Ratio Diagrams". American Museum Novitates 1136: 23-45.

Simpson, G.G., Roe, A. and Lewantin, R.J., 1960. Quantitative Zoology. Reviesed edition, Harcourt, Brace and Company» New York.

Smith, P.E.L., 1972. "Ganj Dareh Tepe". Iran 10: 165-178.

Solecki,R. L., 1964. "Zawi Chemi Shanidar, a post-Pleistocene village site in northern Iraq".In Report of the Sixth International Congress on Quaternary (Warsaw 1961) 4: 405-412. International Association on Quaternary Research, Panstwowe Wydawnictwo Naukowe, Lodz.

230 Solecki, R.R.L., 1981. "An early village site at Zavi Chemi Shanidar". Blbliotheca Hesopotamica 13. Malibu: Undena Publication.

Stampfli, H.R., 1983. "The Fauna of Jarmo with notes on Animal Bones from Matarrah, the Amu^ and Karim Shahir". In: Braidwood, L.S., Braidwood, R.J,Howe,B., Reed, C.A. and Watson, P.J. (eds), Prehistoric Archaeology Along the Zagros Flanks: 431-483. Oriental Institute Publications 105, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

Stein, G.J., 1986. "Village Level Pastoral Production: Faunal Remains from Gritille Hoyiik, Southeast Turkey". Museum Applied Science Center for Archaeology 4/1: 2-11. Stein, G.J., 1987. "Herding Strategies at Neolithic Gritille". Expedition 28/2: 35-42.

Stekeli S. > M., 1942. "Preliminary Report on Soundings in Prehistoric Caves in Palestine". Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 86: 2-10.

Stubbe, I., Stubbe, M., and Stubbe, W., 1980. Die Korperentwicklung des Schwarzwildes (Sus scrofa L., 1758) im Wildforschungsgebeit Hakel". Beitraoe zur Jaad- und Wildforschuna XI: 245-259. Deutscher Landwirtschaftsverlag, Berlin. .

Stubbe, M., 1971. "Wald-, Wild- und Jagdgeschichte des Hakel, eine Dokumentation zum 15 Jahrigen Bestehen des Wildforschungsgebietes Hakel Kr. Aschersleben im Januar 1971". Archiv fur Forstwesen 20/2: 115-204.

Stubbe, M., Stubbe, I. and Stubbe. W., 1986. "Zahnanomalien beis Sus scrofa L 1758 und Kraniometrische Daten aus Zwei Schwarzwild Populationen". Beitraoe zur Jaod und Wild Forschuno 14: 233-270. Deutscher Landwirtschaftsverlag, Berlin.

Swinhoe, R., 1870. "Catalogue of the Mammals of China (south of the River

231 Yangtse), and of the Island of Formosa” . Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London 38: 615-653.

Thenius, E ., 1970. "Zur Evolution und Verbreitungsgeschichte der Suidae (Artiodactyla, Mammalia)". Zeitschrift fur Saugetierkunde 35: 321-342.

Thesiger, W., 1954. "The Marshmen of Southern Iraq". Geographical Journal 120: 2 7 2 - 2 8 1 .

T h e s i g e r , W . , 1 9 6 4 - The Marsh Arabs. Longmans, Green Publications, London.

Tristam, H.B., 1866. "Report on the Mammals of Palestine". Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London 3 6 : 8 4 - 9 3 .

Turnbull, P.F. and Reed, R.A., 1974. "The Fauna from the Terminal Pleistocene of Palegawra Cave, a Zarzian Occupation Site in Northeastern Iraq". Fie Id iana Anthropology 63/3: 81-146.

Turnbull, P.F., 1983. "The Faunal Remains from M'lefaat". In: Braidwood, L.S., Braidwood, R.J,Howe,B., Reed, C.A. and Watson, P.J. (eds), Prehistoric Archaeology Along the Zagros Flanks: 693-695. Oriental Institute Publications 105, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

V i g n e , J . D . , 1 9 8 7. "Biogeographical History of the Mammals on Corsica and Sardinia since the final Pleistocene" Centre National de la Recherche Scientifiaue Centre Regional de Publication 717. 1 - 3 7 .

Voigt, M.M., 1983. Hasanlu Excavation Reports Volume I: Haiii Firuz Tepe. Iran: The Neolithic Settlement. University Museum Monograph 50. University Museum Publication, Philadelphia.

Voigt, M.M., 1985* "Village on the Euphrates: Excavations at Neolithic Gritille in Turkey". Exoed it ion 27/1: 10-24.

232 \oigt, M.M., 1988. "Excavations at Neolithic Gritille". Anatolica XV; 215-232.

\oigt, M.M. and Ellis, R.S., 1981. "Excavations at Gritille, Turkey. 1981". Paleorient 7/2: 87- 100 . ttiite, T.D. and Harris, J.M., 1977. "Suid Evolution and Correlation of African Hominid Localities". Sc ience 198: 13-21.

\an Wi jngaarden-Bakker, L.H. and Maliepaard, C.H., 1982. "Leeftijdsbepaling aan het Skelet van het Wilde Zwijn Sus scrofa Linnaeus, 1758". Lutra 25: 30-37.

Vreschner, E.E., 1983. "The Submerged Neolithic Village Neve Yam on the Israeli Mediterranean Coast". In; Masters, P.M. and Flemming, N.C. (eds), Ouarternarv Coastlines and Marine Archaeology: 325- 333, Academic Press, London. bright, H.E.J., J.H.M. Andrews and W. van Zeist, 1967. "Modern pollen rain in western Iran and its relation to plant geography and Quaternary vegetational history". Journal of Ecology 53: 415-443. touheng, L., 1981. "On some problems of suid domestication in China". Vertebrata Palasiatica 19/3: 276-280.

Seuner, F.E., 1963. A History of Domesticated Animals. Hutchinsonx London..

[or y , N . , 1 9 58 , "Neolithic and Chalcholitic Sites in the Valley of Beth- shan". Palestine Exploration Quarterly 90: 4 4-51.

233 APPENDIX

Tables and Figures

234 Table captions and notes

Table 1.1-10 : Tooth eruption and wear in wild pig samples from

Hakel.

Top lines represents upper teeth, bottom lines

lower teeth.

Abbreviations: M= male; F= female

Table 2.1-7 : Individual cranial measurements of wild pig

samples from Hakel. Measurements are given

to the nearest tenth of a milimeter.

Table 3 : Epiphysial fusion in the wild pig sample from

Iran.

Table 4 : Individual postcranial measurements of the wild

pig sample from Iran,

Table 5-26 : Tooth eruption, wear, epiphysial fusion data,

and individual measurements of modern pig

samples from Ziguinchor (Table 5.1-2)); Tunisia

(Table 6); Spain (Table 7); Italy (Table 8.1-2);

France (Table 9); Netherlands (Table 10.1-2);

Germany (Table 11.1-3); Schleswig Holstein (Table

12.1-7); Darss (Table 13.1-6); Austria (Table 14);

Hungary (Table 15); Poland (Table 16);

Czechoslovakia (Table 17); Romania (Table 18);

Turkey (Table 19.1-4); Israel (Table 20.1-7); Iraq

(Table 21); Iran (Table 22); India (Table 23);

235 West Siberia (Table 24); China (Table 25.1-2);

Sumatra (Table 26.1-5)

Abbreviations: F= female; M= male; ?= sex unknown

Sp.Nr.= Specimen numbers which

were originally on bones

Table 27-46 : Individual measurements of pig samples from

following archaeological sites: Erbaba/Suberde

(Table 27.1-5); Cayonu (Table 28.1-15); Gritille

(Table 29.1-2); Hayaz Hoyuk (Table 30.1-5);

Kumartepe (Table 31); Amouq (Table 32) Ksar’Akil

(Table 33.1-11); Kebara (Table 34.1-2); Hatula

(Table 35); Hayonim (Table 36); Netiv Hagdud

(Table 37); Ein Gev (Table 38); Salabiyah (Table

39); Nahal Oren (Table 40); Yiftah el (Table

41); Jericho (Table 42.1-2); Abou Gosh (Table

43); Beisamoun (Table 44.1-7); Munhata (Table

45.1-2); Sefunim (Table 46); Neve Yam (Table

47); Tell Dan (Table 48); Nahal Betzetz (Table

49.1-2); Tell Tao (Table 50.1-2); Ain Ghazal

(Table 51); Mureybet (Table 52); Ramad (Table

53.1-2); Tell Aswad (Table 54); Umm Qesir (Table

55.1-2); Tepe Asiab (Table 56); Sarab (Table

57); Siahbid (Table 58); Dehshavar (Table 59);

Ganj Dareh (Table 60.1-2); Ali Kosh (Table 61);

Tepe Sabz (Table 62); Hajji Firuz (Table 63);

Palegawra (Table 64); Karim Shahir (Table 65);

ZZ6 M'lefaat (Table 66); Jarmo (Table 67.1-2); Gird

Banahilk (Table 68) and Matarrah (Table 69)

Abbreviations:

- Sp. Nr./Exc. Unit= the original identifying

numbers or letters which are originally on the

specimens

- Period/Phase= Periods and phases were specified

only when they are known for multi-period sites

- Mous-Mousterian; MP-Middle Paleolithic;

Aurign=Aurignacian; UP=Upper Paleolithic;

Keb=Kebaran; G.Keb.A2=Geometric Kebaran A2;

Mes=Mesolithic; Nat= Natuf; PrN=Proto

neolithic; PPN=Prepottery neolithic;

PPNA=Prepottery neolithic A; PPNB=Prepottery

neolithic B; UPPN=Upper PPN=; LPPN=Lower PPN;

EN=Eneolithic; Has=Hassuna; Sam=Sammara;

Hal=Halaf; Ub=Ubaid; Chalc=Chalcolithic;

EBA=Early Bronze Age; MBA=Middle Bronze Age;

Ur=Uruk; E.Dyn=Early Dynastic; Medieval;

Byz=Byzantine

Figure captions and notes

Figure 1.1-7 : Log ratio diagrams illustrating the variation in

measurements in the wild pig samples from Hakel

and Iran, with standards based on the same

samples

237 Figure 2-20 : Log ratio diagrams illustrating the variation

in pig measurements from Ziguinchor (Figure 2);

Tunisia (Figure 3); Spain (Figure 4); Italy

(Figure 5); France (Figure 6); Netherlands

(Figure 7.1-2); Germany (Figure 8.1-2);

Schleswig Holstein (Figure 9.1-4); Darss

(Figure 10. 1-3); Austria (Figure 11);

Poland+Hungary+Czechoslovakia+Romania (Figure

12); Turkey (Figure 13.1-2); Israel (Figure

14.1-4); Iraq (Figure 15.1-2) Iran (Figure 16);

India (Figure 17); West Siberia (Figure 18);

China (Figure 19) and Sumatra (Figure 20.1-3).

- Standards based on the Hakel sample for

cranial dimensions and on the Iran sample for

the postcranial measurements

Figure 21-46 : Log ratio diagrams of pig measurements from

the following archaeological sites using the

standards based on the Hakel sample for cranial

measurements and Iran sample for postcranial

measurements: Erbaba/Suberde (Figure21); Cayonli

(Figure 22.1-2); Gritille (Figure 23); Hayaz

Hoyuk (Figure 24); Kumartepe+Amouq (Figure 25);

Ksar'Akil (Figure 26); Kebara+Ein Gev (Figure

27); Jericho (Figure 28); Abou Gosh (Figure 29);

Beisamoun (Figure 30); Munhata (Figure 31); Neve

Yam+Nahal Betzetz (Figure 32); Tell Tao (Figure

2 8 8 33); Ain Ghazal (Figure 34); Mureybet (Figure

35); Ramad (Figure 36); Tell Aswad (Figure 37);

Umm Qesir (Figure 38); Tepe Asiab and Sarab

(Figure 39); Siahbid and Dehshavar (Figure 40);

Ganj Dareh (Figure 41); Ali Kosh + Tepe Sabz

(Figure 42); Hajji Firuz (Figure 43);

Palegawra + Karim Shahir + M'lefaat (Figure 44);

Jarmo (Figure 45); Gird Banahilk+Matarrah

(Figure 46) ji -jj i6y «»S al 1.2 Table

2 U

Jble 1.4 tt 'ij »t* »•! p N . n g t. 3 i d) dp* dp) il Agi in cIp.Nr. tr. 13

245 St> ({i Sr. |]

In Agt Sr. 13 t AgtSti 6 r. |3

2A9 P N PL n IM R.«> H L HJM H HP HI H M H I SsasaaisisssisiSsSsssiasiisaaassssississisiSsSsssisia j-

55355553552555553525553555553555555555553555555555535 3S52555533235333S33555553335522355533S55S535355555355 5 35 5'sSggsissSisSSgsiiSgEsEisislggsissssSsSSSgsiiisiE-a i2sssHs^s2?:3sEi?ssSsississiisiii = iisiES5sis:s^i^iii sSESsasisEssSsSgSsssgiEEEsEEsgSSSgiSisSsE * 15555353555 S222‘«55s 322£5S2s 5s 5s 22«Hs 55 555s 225552ss 52s 5222255s 2S 223'5s »V »V M Y W,M *,« »Y 1,H tV t«-i j I aaaaaia5a§aaasaiiissaaassa£saa£saisS52is!saaa5S5assis 1*0 0*0 »-*0 V o 0*0 »-*0 j 1*0 V < V V l 1!/'

s * 555355 'SsSsrss's'ssSIS' ' sssss ' s ‘ asssssasssssss ' ssi V’ SSSssSSgssiSSiSslssSssSssssssIIssssaiaSsissssgSSsSs * S u-'u VS u-'u g5ig5a55Sg55ag£I5S3sSgs5Issisa5sasSsss55lgI55ssa5gg3s ~ iaisss5s5saga5ggsg5gsg5g5s5gg5gg5£55Hss5g£IEs5s55g555 s s225223 2225225222 222222222222222222252222222222223252 * iHlIll'llllilllllllllllalllllllallslllillllalalllslgl s M

2522 251222222222222 222222222 22222 22222222222 2222222231 " glEIisEsssssEEsssSEsisIs^sissssssisSsssEI'siElsssissI " 2:SSSSSSSSS££SS§2SSSS?2JSSS225SS2:S22S3S2SS3SSSSS?S£S-« 5355535255525355555555555555333553335E55535535555555S-> VMrMMNSSoSS^»eM«S5£»^S«Mo^SoMr4**Sl3*oSui*S»u)*M^»ufoSSfgS^ i£ESEi = £S5E5E5i5555H55EEiSEEE5ESi5E5555iS5Sii5S5555B2.-.* 5555555555555ss555g355555553553=553£55s5525555255E5g3-* 53355555555535355352553535555555353555552555532555535 55552532555222352522555553555533535553255355535335255 *-« 2 222 2255355s5 22 25 222s52222222323255522222225222222233 555553 *.- 251 '• <-i ...... - ...... a - -...... - f v 2S2sss *M'»4 sssj:;

'Sis5 5 IjO 555555 55555s

555555

siiEESiiiisiiiii''sillSlls'illiiiliii jUy jM-J 5 5ll5il55=5g5s5is,,Ss35gSI~'5£g5SI3Sg=

55 555555555555555555555555255555555555555555525555555 **,« 5 ‘ 5255555552555552255555552555555555555555555555555 55 ,M ,M 55 5522555252555555555552555555552522525 5-2 552255225525 1

22222sss225i52s2ii52s525is5s55522i5i55 25sisii52i2 25 VR^II 5i5i2i2i2522i2ii5i225ii55i25s555522iis2iiis252s55^^ y y dy 2ss52«sss55=gss55ssss=s§5s22 5sgsi2sssss52s555Ss5 25s

5s55s5s5*S5s55555s5555S552555SssS52s55525s WjM ljM SsiSgS ISssisasls£15s22551issisSsSsSSssssssSsSisslsslSSSs2 • 8‘ Ig 1 sSsggl ssasit: V * V*< Vl/« V f| *0 ssl;;; 2SSSS2 'O iakO M iakO 'O K s ’ssi’g'ss’s ’l f l ’lssss’ssIs'ss’siisSll’SlI’ ‘ a * s ' ’ I- sSssSSsHSHSSSSsssslsSsssssgSsSsSassssgSSssHSsssgsss *7 sssgSsassasagggsssssssaSSg'sssasSisisilisa i SisigggSsSgSsSiSisSsssSSsisiHsSsissgssiSSSgsgsSESsSsgEgsas “= sSssss sSSsSIS3ISsSSs3ss9s3SSgSSIs£SS3S=SS£=s£2S3=sgsSsSSs * gggsss sSSSsSsHssSgSSggsSssSggSHsSggsSgggSSSSsSSSsSSsHsaSS * sssSgg iSiiisiiiiiiiiiiliiisisii'iiillgiiiiiiiiiiiiiiigiil - susissSgiSSsSgSgsSsIsssSi''SS3sS lilllllllllllill''iilillll'Hill Islillslllsllilsllllslllll‘11111 ggSiis rssssssIS‘SaasSgaggsSsssaSssssaagssSgsSgB'SSSggsss - issssi 2ssss1552555s15s5E55s155s 's55sss2Es55215s5ss255S25s

55555515 2552252552255555555552555525555252522555555 222 522'2555EEsisss*2525'SssssiiEIE25855555525222555521 -« 2 2 5 = 2 5 5 2 22 5 2 2 22 2 2 2 2 2 2 5 2 2 5 2 2 5 E 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 5 2 s 2 5 2 2 2 2 5 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 55 255255555225525552555225525555555555555552552555555 -■ 252555552555555555225555255522255555252555555252555 255525 52 255252 5252525552555522552555555225555555522 E5~5s2s~22s585~2ss55s=5ss552~22s222s~5s2£EH2~2H22s2 ~-

SSssSgssaSHssSlSaslSSsSssS‘ s2gSgss552 = s»*g 2.S* f r ■■-. sasassssaSaSglSssaissaisSssSSasssSSsasSIssgssSssSsSISSl i 555fSS5S55535SS3S5SS5•SSr23SSSS53?SSS5S322SS2SSSS^S555- i syasssysgsaSiisKsigsssjssSaS’EaEEHiEESaEiEEEjiEHEEEiEiiEiEs % g_ ss^s^a^a^EEEEiiEiEEiEiEEiEi * ESEEsisKsEEEESEEEEEEESESaEE r" s_ sssEssj^SSEESsEEBEisESEEEEEE ’ EESSsiiSsiEsESESEEEEESSsEEEESI a' fisssasssssssrssssssiaSgsiSssKasiSiKHsssSsBgssHasgasSsss g SssSSSSsSssSSSSssgsSsSssSSSiSSsSsSSSsSSsssSSSsSSSSSSgSS

K. K. »_ *u sigESESSiEiSiEESEiEEEisEEEsEsESESESsEEEEiSiiESiiiissESaSSiS g* ssEEEEEEESEEEEESEiSEEESSSEEEsSESsi 5ESS55E5EEESSi5''' § ' 5 l- sgSESEEiiEssis ’ EEsiSESiiissEaiESaisEiisaSIEisssiEsEsEEa

=v> %

sHII SSsSSSsS* sSSSsSEgssSaisSSsggSsSsSSSssSHSsSsSSsSSSSs -

'Sg* 'ggsssS' ' •»' ’ 5 s ' ' s ' ' s ...... ss a s s ' s ' a ' s ' ' -SEE ' 's s ' * 1 ssssssSISSsssSsssSsIsssagSIIIsISssssSssssssgSSssSIgSSsI

-g "s . .33 33SS332223 g "g 55ss 3E5s55525£S§sHsIsEsEsss53s5sE2 22Hs5S2E225E25 = Ei = 25S _ g

~ - L K» •4 a a 5a5s52g3sssissgssssssig5ggssggisggsg5g££sss52sS3gi3S53g SSsSSssggssssEsEsEEsSsg-sssSsssSSSssssSsssEsSEssssEss-s sgagsagggasEggaaEaalsaaEassssasEssaiaEaasaiialsiigsssaE Sags sssS’ssalgaasSSgsSsssaSSiSgssaisss‘sasSIssisssSSISs

SgsyssEE'sgSsssSESsssSSsEsSsSSgSsssSSs'SSsSSssgESSSssES =i=gisss'sEIiiasISSilsSiisiiiEsisssiE'ISiilsIsEIillssis N L M f IL Iff DMP PL N

i EIE iE s 5 E 5 a I E E 5 s I s I s E 5 i E i I = S5 = sE 5 E 5 S i s 3 = = 2 = s2 = £= =: = sss = = MSssiS^SgSissSaSasgssiHssKoSSiissaSoSssgKSKgoSii-^So^iiMoo- o>i£^iisiiiSi3iisisi§iiSaSoo3SuouNNo3Sss3o»35ossosssssis — “a K) g

253 3 s

s 'ssssssisissSssssSSssssa

3SS53SSS555S • S5S5:5SSS52S E5s5E55S55s5’255555525515 12255222115::’215S51552E2E; 521225222121 ' 555555152255 252155522151'225155551552 al5 2IsS2sssssssSSiSi35I5Is§IsS2'IlsSIsSIIIIIsIisSIssssS sSISsssIsssgaSilssisSIisssSsss

iislSgsllsslgsissliigseisSsllSsgSiSsSissislEsilssillsszi iislSsiiSlEliglHsliiiilliisSlislllllsii'5 5 i's

g“*S2gs£~Ss2£SySS2sSsS3SssS«K sse Y dH{H ly 1,H «,» W (H jH-,« £H-J {*y ,d-,d S !,<•» ■%» •%* U d> •%* ■%» U d> !,<•» {*y ,d-,d S »B>V * £H-J '* jH-,« y W (H «,» ly 1,H Y dH{H SsssssS*ISSssss3=2s2~2 *4 •a SSssgssssSlSia’assssisssgsHsssSS

« * § * SS5 * * 2 1 §5 ' 1 2 1 ss * ss ~ l

SSsIsSs’ssssssSsHssass 'S3' g "s 'ss • sssssssssslisssgss “■a js 155 * gs5555552s552ss55s 1 5 1 ' * 5 * 5s ’ ' '5 1 s1 * ‘ iss'isssssS’51 ' s ~± a'sssaissSSssas'SsSsigsiSsassSsSs > "i++ 55s52 5 555 5555 5225225512s2222 5sis5 5Sil25SS = 5l5HSSS = Sl^SI 2515s 2525sssslsSssSlSlsssSSSSs5sgsSsss555s5255 552 5 2 555 2 s 555555sgs5sgSs5s555sSs5sssgsSSSggSs55ssss55g55555555555 *

§llll5illlslllsllslll55lll5slllll5Sl55ls5s5sss55iiS55s5 =

55555 55555'5555555555555555555555555 ' 5555555'5555555555 " IslsisEssilssisiisisEsisEil'isiillil ' slEIiisisIIiEssIIs

522122122255225552222225522525252 IlilsiESEslEslEiisilEilEsissEEisEslsElsssussssiEsxssEsi^ 15511 555'515555222225555255225512222122525:225555555525- 555555155555555555555555555 5555555555555555555555555555 55555 5555555555555555255515555555 5555555155'155552 52222 5555555551555555225555255* '522225 H225E2s22E2S52SS52sSsE2ss2Ssl2sHS22s22

ZSh * r % 9m Z~ « s ssiii§iSli2iilll=slsll3=32'53lSsgl33sls*3ll3S|=SS5lsSsfl sssssssssssssgsJsssssssssi'ssSsSssalaSSsaSSsSlisHSss'sS

=»- o

»_

--««.^M ^asu,sB*sstassa!;ssssss5ss!SfiSfi5f5a5iSs“5si5K5alB5c“s J- ::-:::::::::::::!!!! 5S 555i i 55555£ 55i « 55i 55^ 555= i 555i 5==5 3- sssss = ;s^^sss2iss£25^^“slssi55i = si£5s; = 2 = sili = ssisiis32= > 35°5£=25=32=5555is55=s555s=i55555s5£55===i55S3==£=ss55=5 *~ s5iS£3=3==5iE5s§i5§5EEE=E5=iE5=i5==5SSSEi53£=£~zE5g§sE3i sS£2SHSs5ss55S5cg«S5«SsSss£=5S£HSHSsSS«SSSSSssSs2£s-“-2- > ?5S = 5SSSSSSSI£ = = Z~

ta tf

ft*i sS38S3SS3S§SSS=SsssS3Ss38SsS5sSsSE3S3b s s S22S23ssS33SbS3S „=

> ft*4 > 4 *s 4 _4 5 * 51S~5s'££-£ * = IIE *Ss * •Ess*sal* ' ’Si*ISS * ~’s * 1 SsSsIs >

sIsssssSssssssSssHSssISIsSsIsssSsSaSISsSssSSiSssSssSssal ~I

SssSSSSsSSsSSSsSsSSSssSSSSSsSSSkSSSs SSSs s s s s SSSSSsSSSSSb ssissgssSsigSalEEsEsssssaglSsgSSigSsllgHaagSSSsssssiaisE » HssS2ssssss2SssSs22s2sSsH2SssHssS2sSssSSsHS5SSSs3ssSSEss ssisisiilsissElEEsisiisSilisEIsIiliis Sssisis

ssssssssssassSssH'sssssSSssssssssSssfsssis‘ssssssS'sss^ss EEIsI'sIsisss^sEsisisIsi’sis'ss ' gsssss E s i 's5sl = ss?sss:ss "

g5li5EEsssg5555s£isi5i5s5iiiHEsiis2si55555i5sEsi3sgssssgg -v EISSSIESEilsEssEEiisEsEiEEEEssSsEEEsEEisiEEEsEIsssasaasss -Z E£5g£E5SEEE5ES5555Ei£55E$;E5E5E5ES5E5Ei5iE5E5EE5EEEEEEEi;iEs sEIESEEEESEEESESSEiSiESsisissEsisSssEEssasgiEjssssisssasass -* EIEEEiEE5EiE55i5i5Eia5Es55s5S55E5E55555E555EiSii55sEgESE =EEE5EEE5S5ES5=S5ESSEES55EEs5s5E£sEE55iSEsE5E55SSEiEE5sS ESSsSES2232222222222sSss22SS~2S2sSS2222-2222222222222222 ~- EEsEEsEEEEEiEiisE 2SS -- UMO'^OU*LNIDUtO«H»*»>WC4 O M m LA OMl«eMUIU»UtO o ' 3 2 s g § sSssSsssS sissilsislissisi iisiiiiiiiiilsii I MMW»s)WMMMWM»aWKJK) « eooeoveeoiAewieu*OMOODM*00*>»*4a)0<«« •-o»*eeoeoeaDec o c c

M M 1

256

s R R 3 a I* 2 S’ 3 S’ R 2. : «» e «» i * t * t W •JS* e P P £* P 0 * R £ 1 s r* o • r-* £ %n at cn ■o s ■o r -

257 J U H H I 1 1 Ofc Pb o CP Pb A o 3 CP KJ KJ KJ CP CP A o o KJ ua o KJ CP CP KJ O UJ — CP ua CP KJ KJ CP o KJ 0k CP ua KJ CP KJ UJ KJ CP CP CP KJ CP i o 00 CP ua s KJ CP KJ 0b O m o 3 bp 3 KJ bP 1 1 • 0 ua A o O o KJ KJ CP ua UJ o A KJ s CP CP ua CP s —— CP CP — — g UPCP 3 KJ KJ KJ ua ip CPO KJ KJ 3 CP bP O o o o KJ KJ ua 0k CP o 3 o KJ KJ KJ CP OD CP 01 o CP ua KJ •• o 1 bP s — 1 • • * •• 1 t 1 o CP O CP s OD o KJ o UP ua o o o A o ua ua KJ o CP CPCP CP CPCP — KJ KJ KJ CP O O KJ s o CP CP e KJ CP KJ s CP O CP o CP KJ CP — — CP — o KJ KJ 0k 1 bP UJ • 1 CP bP KJ O KJ CP KJ KJ CPCP o o o CP o 3 KJ UP ua —— UJ CP o CP UJ CP ODCP KJ KJ CP CP UJ o KJ CPO 3 O CP —— CP KJ CP KJ KJ KJ CP o o o o 3 3 KJ CP 0b O o o o KJ KJ o o KJ KJ KJ CP KJ 9« —•• CP CP 3 3 ua bp 09 OD 0 CP «*k i CPua ua CP UJ CP o 4* A o KJ O o UJ O CPUP3 KJ UJ KJ CPo KJ m CP KJ a 0k A UJ CPKJ KJ CP UJ o ODCP o KJ KJ 0k CPO O e ua 3 o ua o O UJKJ ua CP UJ o a 3 O o O O ua o UJ KJ CP o OD CP 0k OD UPe a s KJ CP KJ KJ KJ CP CP ^1 s A CP CP ua o o s A Pb o o CPUP o o 3 CP o CPUP KJ ss KJ 0D KJ m 3 CPCP 0* KJ ua bP A o o UJ o CP o ua ua CPo KJ i UJ CP A O A CPs A UJ KJ CP o OD O o UJ o ua KJ KJ — CP KJ CPO UJUJ CP o a 3 KJ CP 3 KJ KJ • KJ ua o £ CPCP A O o O o ua KJ CP KJ ua O CP o o o CP KJ CPCP a o o o CP o o o O o CP •• o o UJUJua 3 KJ KJ KJ 0k 3 bP ua CP s ua o KJ m bP s UJUJ o O O O CP o O CP CP 0k o A UJ KJ CP UJ UJ a ua UJ KJ CP CPCP KJ 3 CP 3 cp bPbp *p OD CP KJ •ua ua KJ KJ • t 1 CP UJ CP CPCP O A CP CP o CPCP CPCP KJ CP UJ o bP O o CP o UJ CP «p KJ tr* KJ KJ UJ ua a o p o KJ OD CP «J» o o ua ua o UJUJ CP KJ KJ a O O CPCP o A ua CP CP ua 3 o CP 3 %p o CP KJ KJ 1 4 Pb o CP O -K •K O o UJ CP KJ KJ o CP KJ CP KJ CP CPo O UJ OD o *- KJ OK ua CP KJ a CP CP o OS M K» 1 1 CP 1 1 CP > u > 1 1 CP I KJ > CP > i UJ ! i . > o > rHNH 92907 * ■ 415 2SS 240 145 495 375 205 3SO 235 425 360 470 455 675 295 280 195 910 205 890 365 500 295 680 535 275 820 365 290 330 250 470. A i cr 430 ' 310 380 970 380 345 160 185 1015 190 1085

II *3 » n t S. I I Sr. ftp In m i l "9 9 9 9 5 5 W W il U U 4* MBM M—< 4M 4*<• 3 £ 8 3 ? M ■* c Mia ■ • • ^ a V »• ■ a f _ * . »- »

*A * i- t *_ 0 V i* 4 ■*_ 1 * 5 5 5 1 ‘ 5 5 3 * i ’l l ' i • 5 2 5 a • ■ *•« « a^ a 'i s a HI 133 8" 131 121 I 133 a %" a a m , m m a a

rK> k» Wu» m*>rf

S ' 3 K S S s s : = bT 8 ' 5 5 2 *#o a 2 ' 5 ‘ 5 * ' 2 2 • « a • I - a a a > “i M « 5 m a S S 2 2 3 3 2 M W

M «» fi M LA S 5 8 S K

W * W U M 5 u m tm S3t a

a 8 S o u p « • v* m ** 1 SS S u o * A u u * • S 5 w o I A (3t ^ M M a u M m S o

S - o o o

pa e S S w o aS S ^£ u3 * 2 SSS a a S Ml 2 W 3 m m o o o lissss o

a s s sss a LA * U ul Zo O » M LA a P O «• O (A LA U O

M M e 3 —a a mi a o pi £ £ i i 5 £ s s£ I ■■ M N) "I -W ►J 5J • Nl a «W Kl |h W **r* 0» K A ? a IA M W M * M U M W l £ a s £ *V 260 e 7 le

261 CJ b b B B fe S s * NUW/N UV §j 5s 5 5 5? £ (A § SB O 1 at i a | S SB i W* r — — — •A t* M = S *s» b* b* O b* O Kl o s W 4b b* N» Kl • • (* • • * • ■ • •

..••••. . o> . £ a*

u

•o Kl

Kl

£ £ E E * ' 2 s s S E E E £ £ B B £ £ E £

m b b b b b B B B B »> W » B

1 N b b b b b b B B B B B B B B B B «

a £ £ s s E S S E E E E E £ £ s s E £ E £ Kl

— - • b b b b m b B B B B B B B B b s MB B

B B • ■ U

Kl

• • B B * i b b B B B B B B B B Kl

B B U £ £ 11 s s i i 11 11 11 11 11 II

261 iiiiiiiiiiliiiiiliiiiiiiiii m m m m m • a • ^ ■ • ■ ■ • ■ • ^ • Si ■ ^ • • • 3 • ^

sgisss s SSSS8S \ 55555= : 2 555S5I : s §55555 i 555555 ] i s 'SlSSSsaSsSSSSSsSsSsSSSSs ‘ Si ' SisSSSiSgSSSSSSSSsS *5 ' IlsisSSSSi;SEl is ' lislsilsai ■ H i ' SS ' S353S55SSS Sag 5 5 ’555'8i55 5§SsSS55S555S555' j = ' *555'55555555 = 15555’ 55’ ' ' j Ss’SsisiSSssSRSSsssisSSi’S* ; 55s5§555SS5S55§S5S552 S5555S55S5§5s=55555s5 s5=s~5555=S5Ss55=§H , 5S5*=55S5iSs=S5i5s 3sS32552s3=SS'555 I as“2*5 Ml §3Sss£as3SSag£Sg£3''g J

SS••sj -

gggaas “ I5S325 - SSSSSS - sssisi * sssssssSSsSsSsSSssIss I ss55S~5ss~3ss'SsSSsisS ~ SssSassSSssSSaSss 5i=Ssss§siSS=5sssaSsS5s£ssS : gsSSssassSSSSSssSSassssssss \ sHsaasssasasSssssilisiisaas 3 SSSliSlSgaisiisllSlsIIssBisS : sSIsSSsssSasasass llsllllliililili : IsEiliillliilllll ‘ SssHs^sHsi^S'sSHisIisSi' EEsIIEsss'sssEaiiasssiisasis s a • s a s s s s a a s a s 3 s a s s a s 55’555555=55555i5555' ' - ss•55s'sasssiiiissassiassiSis - as ’ sis'ss5ss55II5s555'5555s - 55 ' 5555 = 555555555555’555’5' i ’ 5555555555555515555 5555555555555§55s5s55 ^ 5siss5ssi55s55iis555' 555555555555555555 3sS5ass=2sa2aS5s5'

263 iiiii ; Frtnct i i asgab VO

” i f r ■ £m v §sS£2 i" 9 :r*5J i* 5 5525 9

S58 = S 2 S S3 3 3 * I 8 52555 552S5

S= t i: fe t £ S 3: C E S

assst 55551 55 555 s =v.

25252

U M | 2 M ^ O * » SSSsS > > 3CSS3 ■ 33S33 C 9 5 5 5 5 5

-fc "± SSsSs *3 55255 * 55555

55555 15555

S33S3 55555 55555

26 A thtrlands oN. e Ae r PLI SCAPULA PELVIS HUHERUS FENUR RADIUS 11 NCIU ftCIV HTIV nil FEMUR CALCANEUS TIBIA Sex RADIUS Age 6r. HUNERUS ULNA TIBIA ULNA So.Nr. e SSSI|S31||||5 lliiggliasissl sg*l«Ila»ls5§ S { * 5=131S3sg*3g ' p x aggSsssSSsSsS if Proxiaal Proxiaal Distal Distal Proxiaal Distal Pronaal Distal Distal Proxiaal Acetabulua sgsg3Ss82*s3S S Sssssssssssss S SaissgasSSstt sSs*SSS=g|§SS :i sSssSaSaigsgs gssggagssissg ?r ss*s5ssas3ass 5 ggsgSssSSSsSS SussSsSSSSSSg SSI*sSsggsSss 5f gSSSSSSssssSg i S5S'sasaggsss sSsSssssSSSgs 5 SsgsssSssSSgS S Sis'5sSsis5SS • s 181'SS3S335S* p - § a §' SsissSsSS 3S§'sssissisa p 8S*§g*ggggSgg 62 gSISSSSSSgggg S 2 SaSasSSsSSSSS SSsSssisssaga 5 1 ssagsgssssasS SsSSssiaaSSSS

SBSsSSSSaSsS* — ggKsSssSSSSSg sSSsssgSssSgS - assisssaSSHss 233§i§asisgi= s SSSisSSSSSSSS E5 SSSSISSIgSall N ggg’sggsgSSsg S 5 SaigggSigsSIg s g=3saSs~g*gSS p 3=gg=ga=3gSSa gsSSSSssgsSSg sSi5gs5S5Ssga sss'aaagsaiis * = ssl;ssgssiisi p = sis'ssasaasaS ? =» Sis' alissilsi

166 Z67 sss ' ss-SSst’sS ' s g ' 3 5 2 5 ' o u S g g '55*515 5 ' 5 5 5 5 5 'EE'sSSSEw’SiS ’5 5 * 5555555555 55 * 5555555555 l53*lsllSSSISllis511 = 355153'SSSSI's'Ss ss* Sscs • *3Se s 53*5Is s ISSb §55 s5s §£§§§£ "*3tv »*v * '»d* ■v* •%* •«* <*r° »° v ■ v »° <*r° •«* •%* ■v* '»d* * »*v "*3tv §ii ' §55'iiiiii 1 - 1 *-

5555355'555535 1 ' 55555KSa“s“S!3!“^~^s5£555 5 5 5 * 5555555555 '5555555555555555555'5'5*555''' *555’ * £* 53555555£§325s55s5£55S55 * t 55 ' ss55s555ss 55c55555522S5sg5g5s5r555’s ssKsS^ssssiSsSsSsiSSSSSs'2 ssSIS-SlxISSSSSsgSSSSSSg'S §S2sH5S=Ss§2=5 gSII-cS ' * SSSSS IISsIsSls-S 55 ' SgSSgg SlSsStSISs v‘i/« v« i'v *"j« y -v *y y *,» *v *v *,» y *y -v y *"j« v« i'v v‘i/« 8 1 * ' SS ' ' * * g ’4 v slss'ssliSs J '55S22SS52S “ ~5 §22g*g3ggS^ .J 'rilHa'sssc -f ■» 55 ' 1 ' SS » ' ’ 'SIS'sS' gg ~ ± ss 11111 5 • ' ''SSgillssI

15 5Ss5=s ~± 5 5 551515 ' ' ' 'sssSSsssSs ' '''«ss3SsSlsls = 55 sssssS ' ' ' 'ISslsllISs ' '■'sSsssSlslsl 5 15 sSSssS ' ' ' 'SSSs s Sh s SS ' ' 'sssisiSisSiSs - s 55 15 5111 ' ’ ' 'iillllslll ' 1' 'sSsssS'5 ' SS 55 15555= **• = 5 - 0 — * IIIIII II iiiiii Is SsSsSS ' ■ ' 'SsssSssSss ' *' ' §sS5ss ' §555 n s 5 5 s 2 2 2 2 1 * s'§§!§§ = 55 ' SSSSSS ' SSSES JS 3 ^ssggs'' • ‘ XSSSSSSSSiS 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5' ' ' 55555515 25 s I §555=5 * ' I*o*°S3aSu' '55=I55EsI5§ -* S 2 5 5 2 5 £ 5 ' ' ’55555555 = 5 • • ' 555555 = 5555 I S 5 5 5 i 5 s ' '55§5g55555' ■ ‘s2i55si§52§ -* 2 5 5 5 5 5 5 5' '5 555555555 ■ ■' ' 5 55 *255555' '5555555555’ •' ' 5 Kj IS 55=555 ' ' ' '55255555-2 • •' ' 2 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5' 5 SI ISssiS 268 • • K ) O 'loO 'O ino'tnoiA i d — — tn in tit m in

i n

a u c c c c c * U K) •— MM - cO' o J t m 9 U 09 09 •— P V? tn e *o n p - p 40 40 M «n o t o t o C O CO

cO si *S> •s> •s> I K) L A CA •so » — As I A l a

IS O s *s« O O •SO •SO *sO Vi vi in vi i n os CA OS O CA t o O'O' t o os Os A y O CA i n si I I I I I I I I to to 1 K> ^ K> 1 • • I I CO CD O K> K> K> K> la i n o H> CO CD OLA LA N» Kt CD to o o K 3 § gto s u N3 *s» to *s» t o K » t o e LA o K 3 £ 5 3 3 K LA O LA to t oa to CA CA LA O CA la 0 o S§ ISO U 4 O M O CA LA

e O' O' LA LA LA O C O to L A to A co l a LA to in o tn » t t y co CO to k K> I KJ CO I K) M I K> IS) IS) M vo — - i n •o o e >s> u M » O' w i n uiC O N ) o O i n o 4 0 o tn MUM KJ I IO CA LA U LA K> CO At CA LA CA t o CO sj o o o t O A to to W ti ^

> * 0 cd g SJS — V) W C O I t o k OS ISO

* 0 9 o to C D K) L A O O U A V CA LA CD Kt *- C A CA *- Kt O LA O LA u * to • A C A • I I AO K> 1 1 u CO A 6 0 N ) o in o o o in o in O' (U IsO o o O * to M O LA CA O O CA LA o o o A CD OO fO O O M CD SO K> K> os tsO m m ►O K> »S> u uu in in e.u m to o o A (O A u * I o o o U M t o CJ N> U to K> to fs> LA O O ID o i n i n o a o o oS i s o O D L ) u i n ot o M t o to s e U utn ♦ U) — fa ts> tn e o U W w i n ^ — t o t o fO to i n o o U M to A A i n i n o I S N) U *- U u U M A C A CA O o o u in > t o w t o O O - - - LA O O s i O ' III t o t o e to e o t o t o N) LA CA LA CA M O to O' L A LA «D A«D B I 4 M M M t KO A ASO CD AO CA C A O 1(623 * * 445 375 300 125 495 355 250 345 250 425 345 445 330 720 315 300 215 900 200 925 380 440 280 635 540 220 580 360 270 305 220 490 435 300 395 980 365 350 140 195 1000 190 1095 8834 r * 335 225 250 125 390 275 190 275 200 360 300 340 270 S45 255 220 150 720 165 730 305 470 250 550 450 210 480 280 215 260 170 410 390 250 340 780 300 275 130 140 820 160 B90 24737 ‘ 7 390 255 260 135 405 320 215 310 210 370 320 395 300 620 275 235 195 780 ISO 795 330 400 26S 600 455 225 525 330 245 280 215 450 410 265 370 830 315 300 140 160 860 175 955 25650 * I 380 260 280 120 410 330 215 310 • 360 310 415 320 620 275 230 170 725 170 790 335 400 265 620 470 220 515 315 225 275 215 430 390 255 345 810 310 295 125 160 870 175 940 51 12 * * 370 260 260 140 425 305 200 290 220 340 315 405 315 620 270 260 190 750 16S 755 325 370 260 585 505 240 540 315 230 265 210 440 400 280 355 825 310 390 140 155 830 165 920 3 ft AT o c z. 10

Sp.Nr. Sci Age fir. i3 a. Ul - U B jp * -E ■- - 1 c e b 3 3 c « w c - o X C • • • 3 5 3 C w • C A O E B w B • * * X K> E < < • * B 1 1 ••• ‘ c X CA E 1 1 W . C w

■ • tmm X c E B«M B B c « c c • . * X E 1 1 c C w B ■ • 270 5 b E X i 1 c w B

• • c 5 E SC « 3 3 3 « « • r E sc c c 1 * • • « E x | i ‘ w. • « c c E 5 • • • • c - ! w . w <_ c w w •• c C x *w E 3 3 « C C « • LA g 1 X * c I « « « w C • •• b u CS s c « c 3 3 C c CAUIH 13711

3 « < * * c « 3 3 «

• ■ •• « e x — 1 1 * m c r Ar r i ( l p «« p i H P 1 C 2 I 4 3 2 2 3 pN. c »» r i3 br. »«» bci Sp.Nr. H3 12 P2 P3 P4 II H2 C 13 PI HI i2 dp2 «P« PpJ il ( i3 Sr. Apr Sri

271 Ill mu h r n n h mi n « w . kki Hinvi rr . - . m . 9nz Hin

273

,3

.Nr. Sti Agt Sr. i3 t il dp3 dpd dp2 »2 HI PI 13 C N2 II P« P3 P3 P« II N2 C 13 PI HI »2 dp2 dpd dp3 il t i3 Sr. Agt Sti .Nr. 12 B3 S( Nf S„ 4#t b l. l. b 4#t S„ Nf S( B3 12 "* 5:s;SS3S?SS5SS=2 = E5SS!5SS:SS25S;S522rSCS=S;ii^S5iS25i 12.S

isisssssssasasisssissassiassgsiisssaseassssis^ssg i9 sssss^ssssssssIsisssissssssssssssssytiiissaSissssJiss E.

SEESEiEEESEESESESsEEEESSSEEiEsIEESsEEEEsEsSEESiEEi I*

S£55i£EiE5iEE5555siEE55S55EEEEiEi5i;EEiSEE£S555iii EEsEEEEEiEEEEE5£EEEEEEE555E5EEE55E»£E5EEE5E5EEEiE --

3sisgSS8sssSs3§===ssS5SSSSB5ssS5SsSsSS3BssS52tSSa "T» -T 'D~

n -« »_ =v. 55555EEE5-E55EEEE5555EE55555I555EE5IESi55E5E If E5i55EE5S;555Es5E5i5si*55Es5i55iE5i555iSE5E, ' %” »5g55is5525siE5s55E^s55555Ii2iis51gi5g555is, s~ =v, %

sSsgsiSSsSsssSSssSSsSSsgSsssSSsssSSSsigsSsSsSsKsg js “S * ’ ‘ 'Sss'S'S'a'SSgSSSSSgSSSSaSggSS'sSSES' ' igsS§ ' *8 S&ssliX33B23Bg5g32SsXS83ZS33im!g2Ba8SS!m8KssSas33S SgKSSSSrSSCEKSCSSSSSSSCSSSfSCrSSSSSSSSESSSCSSSSSSS SSSl5S;SS2:;S5£S^!;;S5S53S?^!5«g£Si;8«JlSSSS5S5SS3SSSg igsislg»s=isssi=iggsi£sHHs=5sssiisssIg:ssHggiHs?^

igsgsggasssssSgsgggsgisssSSigiBsisissasissaasgs’s 5gSgSSS52Sglss§gSsS5gs§gSsS5sSSS£isggSsgs52sggsSs issiiiiiiSisiiiiaisiisssSigissiiigiBsssiisiSiiSiisisiu IISsii5=5Sl=sss52I5ssg52igSI§5SIsISsIs5IS5sS5lIgg

ssSsiSEssssggsEEEsgsEsiSgSiSsggSEigKsHSSESggsiiiE sssggsii ' 1 § ' I ' ' sssEsilsIigiiisssssssssisisssssss

sSissssissssgsssIsssIIiiEsiEIssgssssssislIiss Kx^gs^ssirEEsEEEEsEiEEEEggEsSEIEsEEEiEyESEEi' ss2aii5Eiiii®iiE5Eg5g5g5iEiiE5Es3igi^5i555li,

27A iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii ;• i iliiiiiiiiiiliiiiligiiiiiiissiiiisiisiiiiiiiiiiils ~ Sb • • ••••••••»••••• • «■■■•••••••••••••••••••••••••■•■•.«* ** o>

assSisaiSisasasssssaasasssSsiasssassaiSuaiisSs ■ ss ' ssssssas ssssssiissssssrssssisssssssssxsssssrss

5:'SSaESiSSaEESSsEEEsSESESSSSSEEESESSESESiEiEE EE ' EESSSEESEEESsEEisiaEEEsEEEESsSEESSSEsEEsEEEE EE'EEiEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEiEEEE

EE'EEsESSEEEEasasEEEEgEEEsESiEESxEEEEEEsEEjEiEESE *,« *y» ito *yO •* *6« 1 1,0 IsSsS'ssSassSgasssSsaaaSsSSSsilssSsssaSssSaSSsSsaS 38S

SSS5S 255S55EEISS555E55SS;EESiE5E5aS55£S55aEEE5555i E 5 2 i i SaS555555SiE2s55SS55ii52i555E55555E555E555E5i ssEsi EEiEEsIEsiEEiiiiiiiEEEiEEEEiEiisiiEIiEisEEss 2 ’ 5 3 3 2 ' isrs = 5 2222 '

sS’slsasSssssSSsgsSsSSsgSSSSSgsSs52sS«gSass22s2 l 0 -f i y »y y dy »y y «,h *y jHy t«o ^ s« ,,-,d

SS’sS'ssssss'ssss'ESsS’sS'saSSsSs’SlgaSSSs' SIS ii’SssSSSssISisssssEssassssSasssisssisssSaEssSI Vo V, Vi,. Vi,. Vo V,

SS ' ssssss^asssasssssssssssasssssssssssssssssssss .*0 <•*<» t <•*<» EE ’ EEsisEisassEssEEsEiisigsEisisssssEaEsEEiiissis 1*0

ssS V, Iss V 1J V« V« aSSsS’SaSaSisSsSsSaSSs^SssssaSSSsSSSSSSSSSSsSssSSS n gs£sl'g2s2SsSsS2sSsS2ssSEE§2sSE2g2EEsss2S§252S2sss i s s i s ’iasiiisSssiEassssEsasisisaSEsisisaiailssiiisSSisis! IsasS'SSSSSailsSsiSSSSSslSSiSSISSSSsSsSSsSSSSaSSSS

»>

; ,S2E'222SE2S2E2“22ESSE2sEsE2SHS222s2iEE2SssSss22s ’ ' sis'sIEs'i'ssiliiss'III' ssssssslssll' s ' 1ss'iis "

2 22 2 •

275 giiiiigsiiiiiiisiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii ...... • ■ ■ • • • • I ...... s . ,#« '* »°V ***

ll'SllSSSlS3s5S§s5SSsSSs=5sS5SII5sS3 Is'S'gsSSgSisSSSisSgSgslssssssaSsSia i-,4 i-,4 t !/• * V » 'V 55 I i § I § I issillsi'111 53’5’5'5'3S3'5 15 ' 5'iS5351i55S5535553S53115535355yl & 55' '555551555515555555555i5i535s513 %' 35’5'55551535555355*5355553355531535 5 5 5 5'1555'55i5s555ii5555isisis55s§§5 s. 5555 ' sisi'3155£5iss55553555§5555i5§i ~2S3's322'2=52225112S51SS2325£SsiSS2 Hs55sHi5i555ss5ss SSls-SsssssS2 ' *

SasSi’aassSlssSss'SSSi’SsSSsslSsasSs >

J s ~z z 4

S's'S'HSSaSsS'Ssg'IgSi'SSasssssgE'i' ”-fc sgs'S'gSSsSgaSBSS'SSas'SssislsagssigS SSi’£'£33=533* ’±

5*ia=S#Ss5ial'SgS'gBSI'ssSsSSS£s5ssS saSSssisssSSSS ssiassS'22l3S£SSSSssS 5 siisSagaaSSSaSJasaSSas’SsSSSSsSS’S S * HEsas gSSsssgsSagag ' llllllilllls'1 iilsisilllll'I SsSssSagsssSs'Ssgsgsss’SgHsggsgssSSs sSlEg^IIsIsil’Sss^Hss'sgssisisssisI S 2 5 ' 2 §S5ss*;afs§ =** *5 assga5gs55s ’ s 555 ' 5 i§ff55S5f55^5555g5£555355£35‘s 3 5 3'' ssssss^s®ss2^sss slisssiEsHsIs 555 ' ' 55513553^5353555 3555555355555 155 ' 3 3155S55555S=555S 55555553555=5 15553555335555^5555551 1335115115311 53555555153555^5355335 5555551155151 5Ss55SS35Sb53SsSSSSSSS'B*S5SSS2S22SS 55555555555553^55 SSsltlss§SE32*£

276 IZ /t

277 n r » t l p 0 0 i I P 1 C 2 I 4 I 2 2 I n * >1 0* Sn . * - 0 HI 12 P2 PI P4 II 12 C 11 PI II i2 02 04 Ipl il t »J Sr. In ae/i

2.78

dp] dp] dp4 pN. i ti r il i ir. t{i fin Sp.Nr.

279 sSSsssssaSssssissSssSssSsssssgS ' '

5 'S55555S55S55SSS555S55S'5SSS5555 1 5 555£ss = 5s5555S5ss555;sS5 = Ss555555i 5 5 S555555ss5i55S = 5555555S = 5555;55s2 i 5 5SS5555i:55555£5 = *5 5 5 5 5 5 5 515 5 5555 5 2s = 55gslsl525Is2SI, = I 1 5 s 5515525 = 5 5 5 g SS 51 51 1 s s £ § 5 s s s g 5 ’ ’ ==2ss5s£lisSss«Isg sss

55555s5E5£^£55E;:555£S5555155515i555^:55^:£i55il555515555, 5si5Ei:5ifi?Sis5£S5555i555lS5S555SS55i5S555:: * 5=555555 ’ 555' siSEEliiSEiSsagssaElsiEs’ESaSsiiiiiislg-SsgSliigigSli' s555i55is555555ss55 5s5ss'55 5 55 55 % ssi55s si§2555 5 55 = 5 * 5 55.... sis’’ a~ 223=Ss22**2222335222232S5S5 2525* *

S2isS5S5S5s5ggaSg5Sgg2g5SS2ag522 • j slSssassssssss-SSssSSs -J Sa ' £ ’ 'is §'s s ' ‘ ' SS ' ' ' 5 g • ' ' g§ '£§ ' " 2 iSsSSslSsSsSsiassHsssasigSgllssS s '5SSi5"5S '32S:S5SS3S2S5S5g;s;r2S3 - •5aars3=s3ssss2?sassi3ssss33s|-ss 'ssssSsssssSsnSsssKssssssgssgSs s • ’2' * 's'i's'ssS' ' Ss‘ ‘ s % 2sSsis55 5sSsl5S5S5ss=5 > a sssSfi3si==ssSi3sIsSs5s553sis3!S3S='=52g5gg5gsgssasS25g ■ ~ 5SsgSls2sg5s22sg2ssSsss2555s£5gsgaaggS«22sa2sss2ssgKSgg 5 sSSssSHsssssaslsSsssSsSSsHsgag Hssigssaisgg5 55555551555 5 * =5!!§§!§ii!!i5!!!!5iSi2!sSSIs5s!sSSSa5SsI!5gS55gSS5Is“ *

SSSsSgssSsSsSagssssSss555555^5ss1s’5525=55=s~s~sSS52s55 sssssElssssEssssissSfsissIEI^sigssilisilsissgsisissssgl ' ssssssa^slsslisslsssss •' 5551155lEElllESlslSsss * 1i5s55i5EH = 55 = 5ss55sss£ = = sig£ssss5555sis 55s 5555555555 555E5E55 = E55E555s = 5 = - = = = ;::;«; = = ::5555555E55555k555 555 5 5 55 ' —j 5£5555:r23i5E55551155sga55s = Els£§§53 515515153 55555555 55 - j 5555E5is55551555555-ss55fis==s£55555 j 555515E555555555s5S£55S...... 55555 .j Ss55555x5a555555ss5=2“55S5s 1 5 J «

280 I'sSsIslSlslilSsVlsSsSI’sSllilSsSssSsSsISSISH g'HslSsSsgsssssis’SgsslSssSsssSissSsissSSSsSs s Iii5ai5BEsIss5 sis555sHI Bis

Iss5SsSs3i52 5SSs£ss5ISsgsss£g 'giSSEEiBEisSEEiEEEBiEsiEBiEBESsi EEEBEsESEEBEEss 5' Egg££EEE5S55E5iE££5S5EBESEgSsg sSsssssssssasss EEgEEEBEESEEEBiEiEESEEEiBBSSEEHiBEiBEBsBBEssssss isBiisissBssaBsBsBSBiiisissiSiiEsiiBiissscis^si SBsEEBBssBsssEEsSEiEEiEEEssEEiESiiBEEsiEBiEBSsE 5£ss£His“«B55g5£“.B5s5525=£iSagsB SSssSSsssssiBBB 25B555£H = £ = z52sS5=S5Ss = B?55S=SHs ss1 * 2s S£5s5£Bs£H225SSS=Sss£ral5 2Sss

2s s5isiHsBB2s5i22s-SsSSSSSssssSSSssssSiSsSSSSss ~

■gS'gg’a s ’ •Sss' ‘I 'S 2 ' ‘ s ’ S5 ’ SIS'E ’ s ' 'BE' ‘ S s s s ' s ’ SsssEsssHsssSSissSssssssssssBsBssssSBssssslsEsB SSSISsHssssgsiSSsSSsssilSssss SlioSBSsssSssasBss’issIIESEsBSIsBsiisSSSEissiEI »s£S£issaaEEissEaiEE22iEsiiiisssissEisss2iIS22E §sssBSssSB5sssSSgsS52555ssBgisSESBSSSSSaSSSiSSs iiiiiiBiiiiiiiiiBiiiliiiaEiiiiiiiBiisiiliBiii^ S555Is=5s2EsEss=5s55lIssSI5i5 llliililllllllliil'IIIIbbIssI Iiiiiiiiiiilliiliiililli iliil sssssSggsSgSisss’aiSsssSsSsKgssSssssssasSs’sgSs 2lss££22lisss?2ssHi£slsssis2HsEEssss5SsIss5si i ' SS2S5J • ssissasassisss? sssslasssaslllsassisssi: 5s£SE5£SEi5Egg=5gESB£5£gggEE£5g5SsisSEEiiE5gg55 'EEissilEEiEsEiEi’I'isSE’EEKiElsEEEIIIiissg? i ’ * E’iiEEiiEBBiiEEEEEE’EliBBEEriEEEBEiEEEEEKass gEEEggSEEEBEEEEEBsBEEEgErigEEEESEEBEEEiEEESBsrss EgSESEBESEEEgBEEESgEsBEBBEEEgSEgESESEEEEEEEEEEE EEgEEsEgEgEssEgggEEgsEEEigEEEcEigESgEBEEEgEEississ EBEgBBSsBEBBssEBBSSBBEBEEEBsBscsBBEEBssEEiSSBSE SiEsSBEEE E 5 E E 5 5 5 5 E 5 5 E 5 e sEEsSEsEEE*B SB‘ B B gaSSfssSasssSSs* sSSEsssISSSSS

281 r

a*m v •*_ saSss •#» *-»9 £! * n SsoS J 55555 i 5555 = s“ S S 1 S ! s s 5 5 S I a*

55552 ...... £ '■'ilS=sssI§IS335ssS S£Ss2 = 3 = = s5sJS3S £ £ £ a £ £ - ■*. §55 5=55 =H~ iiisSli J- ScIsssS

55555555555555555555 s T 555555S555K555555555 ss ta ss at as gg ss =r r c l - s a a a »_ 5 5555saS5»25Hi§55555 r - ss5s5ssi55"5s23gs ■a- 5s5lsi5£sss355§ ‘ ’ *

5s£as52a5s3Sasaa2 r*=Vi 5==s====2S s“ 55sHsS2 saasa S £ 5 «a ‘ gEsasssisSsaa -- aa s s •r S = SS“ * i 9 I I 8 s I i 1 sssss

sssts J s i a s i i a J ISsEs ’a* 'laiisss’Ssis 21 ’ ssSSISISsSss i ss’sl5s 221ssSsEsSasassssSss 221ssSsSSagSSSssssss 5 s S ‘ss-saSssSsaaassss si iHliliilliiililsa s= =23g II llll ii Ills is IsssgssxsSSssssss ss sssssslsssssslsss SS ^sEsSSSaSSSS si 555555555555 s5 5is5E5E5EEs525E55 = i552s252a5522555a 55 55555s§55s55as555 55 iEsiSsssiasEIgS S 5 55255555525525 52 ~52~2SS5s=aS=2 I i H fe t £ £ = £= £ £ EE == EE ss 55252552 s ~ ^ aa ~ ~ SS sals zsz

II •»* »•! ) ) NINWflH 6 IES

285 i i mI **I M s s ft 7 g g

s 5 CCSM w w

a»r a* r

E E E E E E E E E S E E E E E S E E E E E E E S E E a m i « m K K ■ ■ K a W a 1 • • | K • «= • a »

« . « - « - « - « « - « - • • « • • I a a K a K «■»

n a a « « i a ■ « K a 1 • ■ • a i a eb

E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E s s E E E S E E E E M

K K m . m K a K • t a a a K a w e a K * ' * “ 1 * '

m •n i M

at OK K K V « • m e a U I ( K K a • « 1 K)

w e a S E E £ U i(W i i I I i i I I II 11 w e I i •- cs nrr 2 r m |n r «« » t»^^^Sm 3 J S^S3w«!Suuw3SSiSSNMeS§uw2fuMuuwuo = SUljttrSt2 S»S»SSSStt£l«K«SssBs

KSSm o * £ 'Sis ’ 11111 § I' sasssasas a 2 ' u**s m m ' ’ ‘ Sa ■ CMK# » • yimMldlUIUIIAMW 1 • » CM CM CM | 1 CM •ssSSESsSsSE ' St)l5KoMMue • SS ’ ' sag ' a e 'isssiiiigii' i 5 a ' £ cm 'siiElilllil‘' g' li ig ''SsiSasSSSSS'' I ' S s

K«s5ss^ijc3;5;ssi5ic55E5iE555sE5K£E55icKH5S«555E55i 5E52E ' 5555rK5s = 55sci5555E5B555£5£5555icK5E55Ei SRSsassaiSsssSBSsSSSxiraSaSiaHsasSsSsssSsaiSsi 555555i555=r5ii555s5E**iSi5H5iSiss5555s555si §8s%ss«iiis:ssissi2£sSssB§35Sasisss§ss53sxs, S2825=2sS22H2s2sSSSHs*S2H22S2S222g£SS2S22sSS ii mu w H i y «,» uy 5y- u fMO ty-fd ty-fd fMO u uy «,» ii 1,5 mu 5y- y i w ,#f *y* H ir* ,»,< »■/» ,J* •»,« it* 5 11 SSssSHHsSSssssssHSSSHHS-’Ss SgssgSsgagSssSSSgS'23 g §

S Ul a 4 1*0 <■ 0 »•'<» 0- 0 M-’y fj-fi/t V w * 0 i 0- fi fj-fi/t 0 »•'<» M-’y <■ 1*0 4 ut r< m i r r r v r m ui * 1 M CM 9* #t V« Wt iA I B m %» u ^ r a w i; * 8 3 * 3 o M O CM CM CM O CM CM it m o o o St e CM CM V i • j M * W * * M U U W 1 1 1 1 o e

UlOUilAOWOOUlO o o o e S o o CM CM V

g a a s a s s s s s 1 £ §

i r 3 3 pwutiAMOeouio Ol O CM O CM CM CM 3 8 m m 4tMAUIWU||l*UlU 1 1 • 1 M U C D * - mm M* M O eSSSueuiSoiA ' S 3 8 S S S 5 ' CM CM W U MM^K»UUW(4N)D I | I • M M M M M M D I 8 5 3 2 3 S S 3 8 S S 2 8 3 3 3 S 3 8 3 CM 38 U Kl S 3 saisau2s25i 8 3 3 £ i 3 O CM si — «^i S S S S 3 8 8 S S ' ''* S o SKo m o m o o m S ' 1 2

M M M | |OM»S)«*R>4M | 1 1 » t *l * Ml V Zi * £ 5 cm *m «m o 4 e « o K 3 £ 828 S22S2S * l i » » £o 8o 3 3 8 8 3 8 8 8 2 1 s W N > 1 r U *4 M U U Ul * * M 3 8 8 o S o S a o ^ m o o CM CM CM o CM 5 O CM CM S3 O O o p o CM O «M «• Z e o o triO o u u « i w w u A u 3 • m

«• O O O O s* o -• o «\ 3 I S3 3 8 • 3 2 8 8 8 2 8 ’ U u M Ul N> 5 w e *s*

CM ** * Ut «4 U *4 M r u 1*J A e M O M U N - w 2 s 5 5 5 5 5 W CM •OOOOOOMO m O m m iNiMaaw^Nuaoui ^ o m u m S o * 5 £ s

M «• m M p. M W |A K» K> •■ I CA * D * t£ O M N N i u*«woi«uti*oou»oo*u^ rj5X*8*3338SS m 8 ** o 3 S CkAUlSAUlU***^*^^14* E£33sil£s3is Bu U* • M« *w * -

DAU«V>N»OMWUIV«wfiM* £ ^ e n e C ut u S Ul

N) *■ v/hi'i « vk'h ?u MMMM»ODK»N»WMNMN»NK)^ N M Ut M M N

A * fi M W * m sssu^sssKKiSstisSys 83823 &2223K3282 ^ ^ M U W

i v k o o u oni W • SS SS « »SS X ** C *5 8 3 S S S w BP»N)*t^CDU>tf$O«»>^M*800 W W I • • I I M OMOSt«U»OOOWIU^MMkAe 1*11 287 Sei Age 6r. PELVIS SCAPULA RADIUS HUHERUS TIBIA HCIII BCIV ffTIII HTIV FEHUR CALCANEUH ULNA ULNA FENUR RADIUS HUNERUS TIBIA Acatibulua Proxiul Distil Distil Prouaal Distil Prouail Distil Distil Prouaal Prouail 288

347 * 7 375 255 - - 433 315 206 308 - 376 - 390 319 - 264 - - - 3 I7 - - - 453 - 867 ...... 352 ' * 309 272 - - 480 341 211 337 - 409 - 428 366 - 290 - - - 329 - - - 487 - 928 ...... 27 N * 435 255 285 120 415 315 205 320 220 375 315 440 325 - 295 250 - - - - 350 425 280 650 530 230 555 310 250 290 210 470 415 275 380 890 320 315 130 - - - 344 f B 407 292 - - 478 330 216 321 - 399 - 434 34B - 296 - - - 328 - - - 465 - - - 9 1 0 ...... I I 51621 * * 395 265 275 125 470 350 220 345 230 395 340 430 325 710 300 250 215 825 195 B80 365 450 300 660 530 255 565 330 255 305 225 480 440 310 395 955 345 320 14S 205 960 180 1045 al 20.1 Table

289 4 i J S08E Ioni 2/1 r rr " " M " " - - z/(n j z/(n ioph ioph

230 C g e i I f | | g C O 1 | o a £ 0 i 0 i e o 9 EB m 9 a a u u 0 0 u w g 1/1 u u 0 cr> B OP u u 0 CD o 0 o LT w i 1/1 0 u I/I i/ i o U> 0 Lf< w V • • • • 3 9 ••• ••.•-••

X m # # .. ••••••• 0 • c

u

r%

X imS

E

9 fc*

*/

B E £ E S E S E S E S E ' B * K S S E ' E E E E E E E S £ £ £ £ E £

1 * K , w w «— W w, h* b b «. K B B • • • • • • 8 - £ - £ n B B B B B B B * , I . • b b . ■ b b B B B B B B « *

B B B B K E £ E S k- *m £ • k_ • t : is E £ K £ B E E £ £ E £ £ £ - - B B B B B B w B k« B B 1 I ' ' • ■ . i • * B • ■ • ae b B B =

b b B ( 2

' ' a

( a ** *“■ ' *—

1 ' 0 • • 1 1 8 • • ' ' K» UI/2E JUI/2 JUI/2 JUI/2 UJI/2 HJU e i B 5 E . B B •_ B e •» £ ' B nrr e b 8 B nrr 1 « rr r «y rm K/ m 0 i £

e e e e C SB 0 0 0 c e S c: c g E 1 0 i 1 0 a ’* 0 0 £ i/i u* u u 0 w* u kT l/l 0 3 © 0 £ «J 0 2 i/ 0 1/* 0 8 «/ 0 N

. £

Xm

**

B B i E S E E E E E £ £ E E E E E E E E E S E E E E E E E S E E E E SB

W b K B k. I ^ B 6 B -» «- B ^ 1 •_ B w B «_ ( -« • • B B B *— i— B • ■ 3

■ * 8 B B B B B B B B B B * m * * ' ■ ■ « B B B B B B B B • B •m B B B B . n

E E E E E £ S S E S E E E E E S E S B B E E E E E E E E E E E S B kB fl B B B B B B B W •— B ■ * - ■ B B B B B B B B B 1 B B B I ■ '

a K ,

' ' 8 W

rm S W B nrr

nrr E B B nrr

nrr nrr fcSS s -

!! rrr E E 8 8 £ g rrr nrr nnr M E E a

231 al 20.4 . 0 2 Table £ £ C c £ e O o s | g | g 2 a a a V a a u K* U) Ul i/ u* L r o u w m £ E W> DO O'*

If • • . a • .•• 3

X • ••• a •••• c

t u

£

« H#

a £ £ i 1 1 £ £ £ £ £ E E E E S E E E E E

. . • ■ a a a i

a a a t a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a

ac a e £ £ £ £ £ £ £ £ £ £ E s E E E E E E

n « - • ■ ■E K a a a a a a a a a a a a

•• u

W K i a a a a a a a a =

E £ c rm nrr nrr nrr 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i i nrr z/inr

f

292 293 isi..£iiSiK§gg..Iiii£liiIg£iigsiiiigisilSSiti8 Siiiiisg = iiii

iissiissssiiiisiiisiiiiiii'i ' sSlsSSllSlIl’ 's ' !=IS53=sSg» iB2S2saSS£B2iBSSS55S5£BSs*3S ■1 *S5sSSg£SSS''SsSstgSSsI3»S iiSs§5ssi55as§a5S5s££E SlSss '’II ’‘5§S5 islisilsslisilliisEsillslsli " ii ' ' ills 8isiasiS5S5S3ilSS£s3*S3S*5gg ' ' 2s*ssgS2 2 2 5 2 ' 55552525515525552525222 '555555555555' '5555555555555 2522'5S2222222i225552555E25i '555555555555' '5555555555 555 5555' ' 2525'55525555525222555 '555555555555''5555555555=55 ssil'issiisssssssiiissgSssii ' EssEssissssii ' i555555555 s55 5s5s'ss5i§82§z555sii5=2ss==i ' 5555s55522 s?5 '555555555555 = 5225' '55555£55S5 = S£552555255 '522225252122 ' '22225555S5 522 '52555552255'1 * ' H s I S s s ' I I gisai£«s:Sia2gS3SSH2gSgs2SsSE * ' 222222s*

gg3sSSS3cSissSsSS5SIis5555 5gSs5SSSsSss5S'Ss''»sSgs'SSgSi

sssss5ssK3SsSsSSSSSSssSgiSs5siS§sssSsiss'55''ssiis'SS3s5 S2S2SiSst825sissssisiS5s;$S2SsSsssSSsssi2'g§,'283s5's8sSs SlsssSisiSsssSsssglSsSIsSsssi'ssssgSsS gslggisssigsllSssisSiSgsSSSSSssSissSsssI'is 52322'15 5 2 5 2g2i35SsSsS5£3»ig3s3sgsg3§£sciS23s22sS2s£'£3 s 2 S 5 S'25252 B^aS^B^SSBBSSSSSgSSSSSSSSSgSSSgSSSSsSBSS'Sa gsgsS'55555 iliilliiBiisll'sl’llilHilllllis'IIslsslill 22121 22252 SSESSSSSSiSsSl'525 SlssssSSSS'SsSsiSli iisiiililiiiiiiiiiiSillli'iliiiiailii iiiiiiiiiBiaiiliagiiisiii'iii'iiiiiiil sisssslsSgSssS’SgSslssSSSgssSlsgsSssssSs'Ss 1 2 5 * a s ‘ I S s s s s'tiiusssssissss'ssisSissxs's'si's'siSSs's^ 'ss'is'ilSsi = 5 = l = = 3 = sl = 2l5ssll5glisss5ss = s5sssa8 = ss2 = 2 2 £ ' gsssisssili 5525S555s555555525SSSS:!;55:5555s5isS5gSsi5ss5S5 ' 5555 2 5 55222 si ' i' IsiisiEs 'si5=2522Ei555=5§2=2s5i555§2ss ' isEsEisssEs Hi ' 2'25225225'222252522522225522'522SE25~i~ ’ 55555525225 5555'55s55S=s5555525555s=55s5555si555555555 55252555=53 555252555555525522252525555225525555555=555 ' 55522552555 2='5'552222255252525522555=5525522555555555 1 22255555552 ii555iI552i5=“255H55=5£=25ssi5252ii55222555 ' *52255252*5 51 ' 52 25S5525555s55S555 = 2 = = 5 = i55555s:S35si55s 5 5 5 ' 2 2 2 2 SsKsssSggSa^SiaiSSisssSaSisSsissSSgsSS ZSA 295 i* K> V 9 ? f w If % 7 (4 - W = 04 — W 3 * -a r £ a 53 . s> 0 (4 s -a 1 m k a s . . « « « « * « * ■ ■ E E E m. K K eb E S s s s « c « 3 a 3 * "" « s « e e . • i i X o m o | | * ' ' • s s K K K E S - ■ K C EE E E E « « « « « m • 1 o X m X « « W ie « E E E E E E k « oe sc m m II « « « « « 1 *« a 3 « « s s s e .. 1 u £2 W * | - < « < ■ e E S ■ * «« « « « C l E E «-• EB 4. K 3 5 •m %m •m -- . i CM U 5r X s m - ■:

’ ’ 3 • W • E E E S

E S k K « K X ii 11 C E C r * E E E m m m 1 5 orr m • i

9* •4

a - s m nrr • • ' ' • I K ' ' *" s s E E ■ * ii E E E K K K «« m m m « ------*•« _ K C m W *w * c «■ T- *■* m 236 I* z“ <• m 9 * • 9m f * * 9 > 5

(tl i *

141 i 11 0CI w w O o Ul O Sss a Sss KKS S § § § S o * w iff

X W 31 W X u u a i 555 55 5 A *A Wl s a x 3 3 « mm 795 1 o S

100 1 m

729 1 »• — — _ — , •_ _— 110 1 ISS j ___

710 1 o u i M - u J

7(0 1 kj a^ • • a’n • ^ r m f« V» V» f« rm 1 M M S* M M 04 0 OJ 0 04 M M S* M M 5 5 '5SESS5ES 140 11 SS m U l ^ijtSSulogl O SS S O W X bl O X O bl X W X U U O S 1 W *» U * 4*1 S s s x s s s 2 srssssSsssa?! s a s x x s a x a a s i i s S l H S r> u r> MOWMwooMa X X 5 rr mu sSSSsSSssBMSSiSS'is* 533123*5 s iutoutuuaSoS s y g a y s • • o o o S U 3 o S - 0> P r « r>

57294 r 2 375 230 260 105 435 340 215 330 210 370 315 380 290 - 300 235 175 850 195 830 370 345 250 505 445 190 525 330 250 300 205 495 405 305 405 905 340 335 130 185 950 170 1000 42440 N * 305 190 205 90 375 295 205 275 200 370 295 355 265 - 260 215 - - - - 335 3Q0 310 790 560 270 440 295 240 235 160 450 420 275 380 650 315 295 125 - 14476 F 7 410 270 280 120 470 355 230 340 235 395 340 445 335 740 300 260 205 895 220 B80 370 445 245 560 440 220 565 340 255 315 220 500 435 205 405 985 350 350 145 180 1005 190 1075 47417 N * 440 290 305 145 530 375 240 365 270 440 365 475 355 BIO 320 2B0 205 970 225 950 395 470 305 685 540 280 600 370 265 335 230 535 460 335 435 1035 375 355 155 210 1040 220 1145 iniiltiliiiiiniiifir i i 1 " i i i i I i Sti Agt • 3-TV 3 »■

“ * ' - ~ fir.

5* 13 sSsaSSS f" sslssss ^ ma mm m , . , „ . - 5555555 % m .. .« .. .u «« «« » 5555555 ______I I 5 5 5 S 5 5 5 ! 5 5 5 5 5 = K 3 S C K K 2 ■- SSEBBii I S iilililil3;isiillsssi8ss SaSalsS's'sassSs8 J- is :i :s ;: :: :1 | g e s : e e : : s * = -

Isollisil'“ssili I - .. .. ------■- -- .. -- - Illllllli'iiSiil s_ -- -- ■ . -- -*• = - ...... - ■« •" *5 = SSSsassaa'Issssg £ ...... 7 , ...... - «- -I - ’5 ’ ‘ 5 5 5 ' 5 ' 5555555555555*- „ ______* «« ■« «« «« «■ ...... «s “ 'E'1555'5'55555555*555 *- ~ 5555=5555'5s555555sss5s *- «■ * « “ * ■* ■• m ss5555555’5gi5ss55 ^ ~ « «« «- -- 2 5s5S2555E'a55s5555 J-- „ 3 ilsSsSEsl*HIIs Issk >

25s55ss«55555«=55 >

S§g = §2ssisS55s2= > “** ** **** “5 ~ slsssSJ :: cs Sf gs 2 sSssSSssSisSSSils ~5 * * slaasaa-T i £ £ s s 1 1 i | 1 I I *

s!SSIS5Jf i i i I i I 1 ! I I 5 i r 2 • t . a -n , 3 = 33 ' 2S “• : • “"a sii? • ss = SS2£sS=.* sisSSisSs’slsiias -j - slSSSalss*sassssS ^ * slsSISlSilslSIls* > * IsllssisIsSsilsss ...... § sSisssasSSSsSiias ■'s'ss * ~ SHssSslsSsssSSssS 555155 * ~ siiiiiiiiiii’§§§§‘'' ='is = '! 5 l s 5 i s i 2 S = I l * s i s Ssllllllllillill lllllilillslliss ; *sssassssssH*sSss* *saals ssisEssississsElssilsiss ” *« cfsssslsi13S£=:ss 555555555*555555= -v s 5 s 5 5 = ' '55s5E555s5555555 -« « 2 *5'5555*555*555555* ‘5555 -* - 3 5=5555555555555355’s 5 5 s 5 -* - 3 ‘555555=5555555555 =5=555='55555555=5 J 2ssS£H=5~=Ss=~ls~S 1 ii 1 = 1 = SI H sg =3 ss ss == == 155555 = 555555 5555 18 fSsslsllSss-SlSfa J 237 E! ' J9 »6» **S I(i t|i (r. iJ pH. « A« r »3 Sr. A?« S«» Sp.Hr.

300 IsllIllliliiiilsigglSilflllg • a ^ • • a • • • • a ■ • • • • ^ a ••<+ • a • • • •

. u ...... • SsSsssII 5*25SSSSS 555555555 555555555 5555555II 555555555 g53sSSs«3ss£sIISsiS'SSssS!sSS S ’;§ssssisSS5s£5S*S 1151555^15 ilEliggiis S£5-£g|ssg 's:::a's£sSSESctiiSSIEi:sci: '**£££'55“B55a5aisas'ag£5S5i

SIIx85Isi;5l255I5SI5 iiEEssl^sssHiEisEsE 82s£S~Ss~~S52sSsSHg SSSSsSsSSs'sSscsS Y «Y «J« V #,« t«-jJ t«-3 t«-,w #V » ’,dB 5 'V *** »t"p »

gssias'is "i SgggggSiS s ' sscssss s ~z S'gSSSgSS* i ' HssssSs - z . sII555s5i5I5II55I»§ SBsSSSsggssSSSSSsSt sgSSIsgSsS ss5S5“SSBSssSI“3Ssgg*S£llggs S8ssSS3SS8sSg3SS33S5sgsSs3a§ g5S3SSsgs3SgsssSisss5iigs5Si §lsSiil5lslS§l*IS'§s*s3*sSs3 SSH=S55S5 iiiaiiiiii iiiiiiiiii =gSs8'SS3ggs2SB»s'Ss=35ssiiS Isiss'sllslsl’III'IsS2 S2 SlSS slssllssssgsslgsslasl IIIIIII555I555IE55I ' 5 ' HI ' II = sII5H5IIII 5513555 '5*151 ’IIESiSIsxIII 5551555 5I5555 '5555II555I555 1555:151 5155555555555551511 I5I5I555Er5555I5II5 Is5s55555SS55s5SS55 115155551551=555 -sssslxcSx SOI mm li.292 r 2 » im w - UJ J - J l/?E E MIW U.2S3 101

/mu it.z tt n wu nun j j u j j j v v 21,1,1 u.M3 • • uu w - u uu y u j je i /2 w MU JUUUJ U II U1/2V V ~ - U WU U H If J W JI/2E Tabic 26.2

303 30A ==»==2i>===5=55>5=55=5===5=5=555 5 » 5 5 = = 5 = = = = i = 5 5 ======5 = M = f ? a = a s ======a ======~ = = = =: = = = = = s ~ c = = = = = s s =: s = a ======sr 5-

52555i52552i55555ii*i255s25iii2i2ii5i2522ii5i=2i5sis5iis2 £ 3? ~ ! «■ SSssSSSisSsSss 2 s s • ■ • * r • s s i 22' ' ' 5 5 s E 5 % iisssislls 2_ s“ 5555I5EEE5 2X_ 555£5555ES -5 •sg’SsS'ssSIiSssSsglS'SsggsssESssiSggcgssSSSssISsssSsSsS

5 l l s 5 ~ 5 1S S i s i s ±-

sill’ 1 1 ' 1 1 1 111 i i s s s ^ ' 5 5 5 S 5 5

■_ 555555555555555555555555“E555555£S555555S5£55E£55£5555S25 « s55555555555555555555s55“55555£s55s555;5s5is53555£55ss5r5ss s55s555535555555I£555si5S 5si SSESEHSiisasiSSssSSssSssEii S sHEsscEgEsESsssiiaisEsSS-ssSisSsrssSssESjssissEsiS ' £55 slsssss^EiilsHiisisiisii^ss^isssissiass^sES^sIHs'issx^ aHsBsgsSsSsiSSSSSSI'isSs5# SS5£g=5£s5ESs3 sSSsggSSSSssSs

SSss^SSSSSSsgsSsSSSSSg'SSgSSsgSSISSSSSsgSSg

isssis15-15555 -2 asIsssssssSsSs KJ > ••'RSSS'S’CS'S 2 “r . . , 5 5 5 S 1 S 1 5 ' '5 _2 *2 ' isss ’ 2S2 SCS “12 isSslSSsssSsSggsssSg'sSsSaSSSssssSasssssIgs s255sS5Ssgs5gSsSsssSss5s5s5ssss525sSSs5gSss 5s55ssSl~SSsS5 sssgSssssESsSsgssssSSsSsSSSgsssgsgSSSIsSSssSssissSsi’sEs* SgssSSSssssSfsssiessssgSgsSsSSgSgsSsisgSKsggsSSSsSsSSSs-g sIsisjisiSss^ssssBssHIaiiisslssssSlSssSssiissssissisisssR ilSSSSSSSlSSsSSllllslSSSSSSSSsSsSSSSSS'SSSSsS'gSSsSSSsSss SSssSsSSSSs’«s lll-Kglsssllfs §5i5ll§lilli55 ' sSSssSgggs 1 5 ■ • 5 • g sssSr SssrissSSSaa'sagggrsaiiiHI^gSs ' gsniassiss!; ’ s ' 's'i 2 SS S 2 £ ’ §£££ ’ 33£S£S£ £ ' 5SSSSS Z££££££~ ££3 3SSgSSSls5ssS2“£:;I5sS£:3 saslsl^ssslisillls-sg 5 5 5 k 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 s 5 £ 5 s 5 5 5 5 555555555SS555S555S55 E E s ' ‘ 5 £ £ s s s £ ' 5 1 5 s 55 iasliisss'sssEsEiassIssssssEsIlss2ss '5='5'15551' 5 5 5 s 5 E iss ' = 51 £ E'EEEEHExiilisIsEEiEEEsi^iii 555 ' 55555555 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 555555555’SisESEsEsEs-EsSsEsSrEsSrsg 5555iE55£555*5555555£55555£555E5£i555£5555555i55£555£ 555555555555^5555555555555555555555555555555555 ' ' 55 ' £ s==5sEsgS2 5s5 s5g5=555sa5sgss5s=2=ss=5s5£555sE5s5'55s2 ^5 SSS5g5555555as5S§55S2sES55 S5=5555£555s ss 305 rrrrrrrtrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr 25E5555“SS3555=55E35S55rs5255=gES5ss ''i*4* “ ''i*4* 1 i(«p ,*-, i(«p £ *' -8_ SSS'SSS^SsSSI'SslSSsSSSSSSSSSSSSS'Ss ~ i ,,S3,Ssg ,52s5Ss52gSSs55sSSis~3sS'~s ? siissNSigSsiSsiisiiiiiiiisss'iiliSs > iiiliii^iiii§iiiiiiiiii55iiiii§B5iii ±„ sSsasSs-ssSSSSSsssSSSSISssIsSSSsssS?. > 55’555S55 ‘£55555555555552555*5555555 f SE'sisSai'255'5555555555555555255555 J- *555S55K='5S555£S52E5E52255555E25555 £5555 ' ' ’ 5 ’ 5555 5E55s55s55s£55s55£:£is 555'55 ' ' s ' 5555555555555255555555555s J* s=55£5r2='sS5s=5=°5s=ssggg555s°Ss§sg -~ 5 = 255 = 5«55552gS25555i5s5s25 = 523r:3IsS r s“S3sas§55s3S2==sss5g55sS5S«2sS52SsS *- i SsssSsssSsHSSSgSSsSsisSSSsS’gKSSsSSS

"J g ~ g g -£ g *4 _g

sssSsSSSSSSSSssvSSSSSSScSSs' ‘s-sisss > 'gi3523s53555s£s523555s35g335gs35s35s > 3g555g5S2s55s255255555ss53553igss222 > g2gss2s£gg3s£g5s»siigs5s555'5S55=2s5 = ssssiSsSggSlsSssssSsssslcilSsSsslasi 5 8ss555gSS5SS5s5§gssS555ss~SS5SSS22ss * ssisiiisiiigsiiii'ilgiiiiiisiiiliiii * 555g5H5i5I3sHs55g525gs55ss£5g3525sg5 “ lllslB|S|||||sEss3lilllsii§'llliil2l * iiiiii=ii5£5ii555£§§§iii3ii'iiiii£ii »gsl33555355g552g'555525552555555225 * ssslissijsssslaiss ' SS!53ai(!S2!S3SSS223Si <"> EiEssE^sEEEEgslssIsiissssgEgiisElEssiSs -**« 555555555555555555555555555*55555552 -v 55...... Ess'g'EssissgsIsSSssssgsEsEss 55’ ’ '5' '55' ' ' 'li'ssEgis' ' csisis'Biss 255i££ES55555'55552555s55555522552E5 -* sitiisi ' ' £55IgI555555s5E£5I5I5i^ssss;g *-* 555‘5 ' ‘ 555'555555555552555555225555 55555£55555££g5£55£s£5s5g5555£5ssg5g 55555''25s5E5EE55E525ES5s5s§E2S5EEi§ -J 'SgSSgssgSggESSSSSssSSsS'SSsSssgsSSs 306 Figure 1*1

307 p -

1

Q.I •O

t Q. KJ>o I ■oa N 10

a a T3

k- ►

103 Figure 1.4 ► 310

N 10 N r— i a

Log rati* — Figure 1 . 5 a 3 ■o f ¥■ M l N> a 3 c > a •o 10 N N

Log ratio Figure 1.6 a x> ¥ 3 U a •o N. (0 N. i i i

Log ratio IRAN

P3

S 1 » X 4o 2 * 2 *

a. | F fti Ii 2F

r%i

313 r o h c n t u g i Z m

t t » a * K> ^«C K «C% c i •«

3 U Tunisia

X

315 • 0« 316

lt| »«ti» - e.'« • o!i • o!j * o! 1 ♦ * oil * ft!2 * •'* * •'* * to', * ' 1 * •'* * • ♦ 0!l ♦ O.'I 3,17 o

318 Netherlands

♦ M Mi

3» •J* 9 a £ * K K K S a a 9 9 a

319 iui 2 . 7 Figuri

2>20 Figure 8.1 6er«iny 321

i»l t«nt *».« - - i.i o « ♦ 0:2 * • ».* • •.« • o;j . o.'j • 0:1 a • #!i « « oil Figure 8.2 322

• • Fused Ptlvii »*» ° * ■ — o fuun| * * unfitted M - n ft „ . .. . 1 . - without or unrecordefcle epipkyiinl fun on •. Schlttvig Holitein 323

loj ntis • (.« . oJj . jJj . 0 « o!l *0.2 *1.1 ♦ 0.4 *0.4 • C.J • C.2 • 0.1 0 ♦ fill *0.2 4 Figure 9.. 1 ia gwgtt 32 A 32

lo( rot to • 0.4 o a *1

a *

325 M * *.‘®* ‘.‘®* o t.i. f;a- era. »•<.- * » ♦ r# • W ♦ »;» * o »:# - i;« • t;o - »:i. »m tai

326 iue 9.4 Figure iue 10.1 Figure

327 ?;• * t|# * • t|# * tj® * * V >-fl ♦ t:# # t:o ♦ t;o • o r.o - t:« • t:« * *:« * •<»»«

328 iue JO.2. Figure iue 10.3 Figure

123 o

3 50

Figure 12 ROMANIA * POLAND +HUNGARY +CZECHOSLOVAKIA

l*| 'lilt • 0.4 Figure 13 iue 13.2 Figure

33A Figure M< 1 Isroel . .

l»l UtlO * 0.4 S36 m. r»

! i jr-

337 iue 14,4 Figure

338 Figure 15 339

lot uiio • •:<

9 a oOk

0*

341 * n • • *•>**»<£ 2u t*

a

3A*

iue 20.1 Figure

X n.

3 « i. iue 0.2 20 Figure

3A5 Figure 20 3

346

• a • -* • «* . « • ■* mm • M - » H • m m v a • w K> ^a m • • • 7 7 *51 ** = = •» m * 5 si iasii a f z i i=si-h= - - 55 ** «* s i 5 & s c 5 U 5 * s 5 s c s5 5 r f t - • t i !••■ !•« *i i •s•■«■s*eii» * *u IM l«t S S * * SB § 4 « S 5 U» 52 » 2 « lit r s ® 5 5' *• * s E * 55* 5 5 5 4 2 5 2 25 5 s 5 5

25 5 2 55 M* z s 5255 E 2 E 2 t 5 55 5 E 5 5 5 225 2 5 2 5 s 5 a 25 % IN i E 5 2 £5 5 2 5 i n i m 15S5 r~* » £ 3 i * S i 5 S B - * * 55 5 s s s a s s 55 5 * 5 5 *. 1 ! * M M K1 M ** * * 4 » 3 4 a 2 “ * a r >

t a T*

i a

K> ^4 CO

« E W» ; ** "■ *> •" ' t'3 ' »'J WP » f>P tP *< ^ ^ ^ **t

V *"*■ */* 1;H W[» 1E» C« l f V >

fl» ^ ' ^ *1 «l f M /poiM| h itm /». /». - I I *4 *4 4 l 4 *

u * •• a a “c ~ h *1 •£ c c a a = a a c c u 5* 5* ^ a* w W 3 s s B S * *Z = 3 349

in a I c s 5 S S 5= S=5 S * 3« S SS M MM ^•^■1 ■ • ••wf) ii] 111 i a ~ AU X-* MM 2 2 2* * 8 5

113 121 11/

^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ -» ITCF [ji m m m m m m m m mm m m m m m m m mm m m m m m m m

* * " • • •» •■*«* «r ^ j ■• h n ■ • <1 a 4 » » > i • .d » • t ■ n • • " •“ 0 * - «-» ■ "i. o » » mm m m «■* v n » S • £ n *“ m r- m m n • • • * “ • ess a Esi ai= a e* e i s l il i i l s i s i s i i is

fr7 ; •» s I

• £ * = SSSiSSSS * = U M U K) Kl K) M M I s s s a s * £ 33233332 * S 3333335333 33335333335353 ££ 3 5 3 5 5 5 3 5 3 5 55555555335555 f t 3 §333333333333333. 3333333 82 33333533333 55553553555535 * >n £ 3 3 3333 sis «f 35_S2S S3 3 33 sssssISSiisgssts 3 *3 * = * s p m

3S1 Ill 120 I3B •»l Ci ■ lilt 111 X i * * i t ? t j s . P u 5 t C kt - £ E E SB •N • >•w in e r>w w s I si s 5* w S ww w EE1E&IEEEES" m * » *S 5 8 “ ^ • £ 2 ^ w w *'■•(, £ 5

iIIC E tiCIEI • • M ^ S « * ?>53 |

-2 g 5 5 g wi£I . T . * ! * . ggg g 2 m m mm is I 1 si i s 2 1 CE si |if 2 £ o . »2

ft ft *lft ft 4ft »ft 1*1 *'* fft 1*1 1*4 } | * » C >| * «l lift-1! *4-l4 V l t*<» **<» »*# *4|ftp **- *4 f4-ll/' **•*• V «V V *1* W ?B V *l" *"lB t"'l" £" ^ **•* 5 '»* *** 't# * t# "*« /»9,i,4 /«»■" e#83 *i« KSSIt « * P F t t S C S s S ir 2 £ is is 6 £ * £ m w m * m gi «• n n n m * • v • «»rr ££!•«!? ""n " MU* ' MP * wUk . ~ " "• 5E552255=5555155 S 5 2 2 5 is E 55 B 5 55 5 S S at w S

£1 SI * ECElEICfbiEEel EfEl < I « EETEiEi EfEE

SSSStfSSSCSSgSXSSS 25 £22555555555 « 5 5 5 5

5 ft 22 a X 2 2 2 c 5 2 5 M s 22 2 2 s 5 2 2 u a A 2 2 5 2 2 K f 2 5 2 K» S * > ss s 5 M £ £ 5 2 MX 2 s 5 m g s i £ £ # a 2 2 £ 2 2 2 e Si £ 2 5 •• 2 2 5 5 5 g a g S 6 **c* 1jM *,B *";■ 1,M W,« t »-,» t«-J jH-ji t4 ,4 S !**» ” »* lfd* *•[* ' * » *<¥-*!

* 4 p - l 4f *4> l4 "*H "*H (*<¥**<» *4 * 4 - l 4 *4 >1 >1 ¥ «l tl fy-'ll

Ik *5 •£ w" E 354 * 2 “ £ S ts a s - “ s s s 2 2 5 £ E * £ 5 S s a s s 5 5 s 5 s 5 5 5 s - a 5 s 3 g « a a E r i r r 5 ; ? ^ tf * V ^ - EEIuitEin!II‘! is is siiii^iiiiisiif : f -s s

a 8 x 8

5 i x 5 5 5 5 5 5 1

8 »8S 3S»s: s & 2 i E E S E E E S 5 5 5 5 5 2 = 5 E 5 » 2 » 5 tt a n EEEESiisSSE 8ts sstftfjci; sEIEEsiiEE 5 r si £ 5 5 5 S S 1;« 41^ 41^ t«-J1;« Wt« ¥*,■ 1,1 41,1 jM-,11 1,4 1,4 V*!/' *0-Ci * * • '< l*<» ***l*<» «**

- l 4 ¥4-*4 H H t W II V Ch-'h

** *5 *s

355 j — IQ K> fgslIIillliiililllgeilislsslllllsssiSsssSSsssssssscsccEsi

4 *w 4

4W 4 I *_ ** **'< l< t,#' **•*' V *"[» tyl W»j« 1|M *,■ ¥*,■ c»-,ll t»-J c»-,ll ¥*,■ *,■ tyl 1|M V *"[» W»j« **•*' t,#' l< **'< * * - * + Ci-'i V*4 V*4 l*d» ***» r"** r"** ***» V*4 V*4 l*d» Ci-'i

3Si 21 ff! H » t I f » ^ ] 1*4 fi'i «'n Vi W*« Vl» wfr Vi K * ft 2 m s: c iss p 2 2 8 2 ss ; *5 n « “ M •*■> 7 M • A 1 • •••■•• ^ * • • • • • • A • * . .r •“ • •« *Z • 2 » •? *“ *£ a *;i, •* a w M M M M M m *• • a a II 1 cp 5r 7 ? IP » * g i I g III I I i I <* O |t-|EE -! : s { Ei3 E£| |-Eg Ij til*W 1 1 - EEEIKS=i f- t* = = = = s s s s as ■ I s a » S 2 ? s S 2 3 Sf a .s .c .. w •** 5 C “ * C*S i S l i s E s i e *i = *53iaj£aE£2*3 §§aaa2S2’aa3SS

*

* «

E

£

» W« 9 S 8 * ssa asasssasssaas ssssas 2 a 3 8 - IS 8 * * ft 3 8 8 S a § i s * * § £ 5 s* * £f B s s a 2 2 s a x s 3

• 0

8 pT*m 5 * br“ S C 5 C » ^ ® ** 5 B£ *8 m 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 55 *8E 5 2 5 5*55 s «•CP 5 •5 • ft# i 5 £ * 2 * S5fe £ ‘E&Et:EEti|IgE E iEirl|ii“tI I'H'llf l l ' H ' I I t “ i i | l r i E i E E E g I | i t E E : t E & >‘ E E B i i i E K & . s l l i t i C c i * s - a 5 a s S i ih ni nr S

8 8 5 s B a S : S S a s a s

£5 S3S 5 Is * o * s E 5 2 5 s £ S m S * S £ 2 £ s c 5 5 5 2 5 5 5 £ • 2 C ± 2 o liliisss s a 2 £ £ 2 £ BEK 5 £ S £ 5 £ 5 353 £ 5 2 * B X B S s a 2 £ a a a

* ‘E *E -s s “E 1 r s • E | 5 £ r* r a % E c1 ■ at Z. J N " «w

M » ^ y jj| ££ •• M y • *y a u M *y 4*9 W K» M ly K0 ty CP> *y M »y mm mm >o M *o mm n ia s*sssR)i*3*cs- iss S s ^ s s p s * ->S 2 p s ?“ 5 S S S n SSSS K> * t ? 5 ? k . u u,,ll,“ * * i ’i “ 2 •» '« u - - — r m m ^ 2 n M u u “ •* ** w _ -SS«k.S«^“ r * w* “ - ^ • ° • K © ^ m uT S i * •• r * w T "*y f m «y *»o w —tm w i s i i j s i s c = “ * ~ 65 5: 5 “ 55 j 55 ■' n a a ~ ~.s a ss S s s ~ 2 = 5 * * a 3 ? g *^ss^iatgsH^S ^ JJ •■ k*»- v« i/ v w *42» m t«- i«asiOi*u«4^5552**^!? 2o 2i?2SShi m ^ • i« m hi v« m m v> ss m : ; : ; 5 S 2 s s 2 «, a - «

EfclStrESE E T * 5: Ell |f feliEEl !z £EEEgEE EEitE «---*-

%

SSSS3S 5 5 £ 5 5 5

*“5a® ““8X55 8 S : ; 5 5 8 2 5 5 5 5 5 — 55=5 *52555=5i5==5555==55555=i 5 b 5S55 52 Ss§ 5255*5 55 **555555 55 tsss:s *c52ssa£ 2 252555s « a 2255 *as * 2252552 •E 560 * o.

u«

fra

E %

E ^L *

•y« •£ 5555555555 2555s 255552 . 2 SS2S2S322S 2 222 2 u? 361 ■■■5525225S222222222222222222222222S8S8SSSSgSSSgSSS8S§g £ Z 23iSs = 2SS5sSli3sgSsiSSls5£issSsS-»S5iii-i2iis;S2sS523SSg 'I ” 2 5 2 “ i S S 2 = = i|SSSs223§*s22Sr = SSS° =I=~~~ f ”

*1

S;r s- - £ BBB s I S SSSg 3SS55S5K5 § 93 335 5 £5355 S II SasssSs Isas gSsSs Sg s3g§«I 2 3 333 n » S5SS saasss a SsSg Is I a §§S» » SIS gaaSSsSg 33 3 i ssss I Is 5 III §5 55555 sssSss IE IS 5 5 55s s

illi* g£i3£SSsSS£ii|SSi?£i£i?iSSgi|££S£S*sSSiiiSE = **g ' I "-rrrsrcfTrTTr-r’rrrTf'fvrwSrfliSvvTT SSS“ SZSXE5sssi;»sS= SSJg S S S a S B '-5 S S 5 5 5 B 5 “ = S S 5 a s u,* MO,J,w 2 5555IS=s55555Is2SssBSSSsBsS55 5I5S5S5=I55555S=5a5sssis

•...... s fi ...... if isssS £53§ Sail! Is: 3 3= 3£a3£ *: gggggsSa gg 33333 32 333533 5535 5 S3 Sssg S3 S S S * 5 5 • * * a s

32222222222522222222252222222222222222222522222252253222 2225E“222225S2S22222"!!52225««2222»22Sis8SSggSSgSSS88SSgg sssI^sMss^is^sSsIIss^s^^Ss^sIs^sSIssosmsI^pi^s^MsssI 32iSfSi3i0Ai=2?i=iSiT35==r?Sr2=T:SiI"3 --- 2 2 “ “ “ “ ° •* J> ~ 5!!5;5!!5i;5S!J^ t ? ? 5 5 S ? ^ 555555i55555555s5H555s5=55E555s3s5ssiss*a3Essa88Qaa8SsaE *1 I? - E gssisSS SsSSss £3*535 3333333555=553 3 S i £ S S3 i £3533 SSsSSg 3355333 5333§SgS3S5sS3s£3g 3 a 33333331 3 H SSgSggsSSSSSgSSs ggSgggggsggsSgSSgaggSsggggSsggggSgg ggg

I* 7 iiiiiliiiiiiiiiiiliiiilliiiiiiiiiiiliiiiiii 9 £ £ p s s s £ S a2s£s5sIIg25s '*3sa2sIssqR||sIIsss = ss T^TTtTtSrttttTl'TS^YT TtTTtStf 22? |t22trtSt2 s 2 •* a s a a ^ s a x a s *•* s ss 2 a a 2 asaaa :8S s * a ssa a SSSaaaSSaSsgSsSSSaaSassIssISIasSiisISIssssx *i H Sis SsssiasIaaaSsaSSsiaasgSSSsaSSgSISIsassa sf S « lalsss sSss i I SI sa ssssaSiaa “5 BsasSSSSsgsISaSSs *2 » Sslss aga^gssEE 5

362. s*issgi33sEs5*E3£5EE3?5??553*S35?a53i53Ss33333ai?3 r ;TJ¥2lffTl,“2f2f2?TT“2lfT52 2?,f2 tt2 Y 2 *,'“ — » “ = «•- *» < * 3 w — = --5d.BS tt * =- = -i = * i -•*■ =5 - sss5s;5-|-SS55se_g. = - = H;ss

8333S53=33i55235i5S5S=5s5E£S5S=E5E£5SESSS55S5S5SS35S£iE5££s

...... - ...... ——- ...... If isHSsif 22222 222222223222 252 2 2 2 2 2 g 3 2 2 2 2 5 2 2 s 22 222222 323 22322223S22 5 2 2222 5222 gg ggc2s=2S S3 222 ’ 3 22SS 2 22 S 3

:52 2::2:2::2:222=S222:22S2S22222222222222SC222222:2::2::222 *T issHssisssssssssHHsssssssiiiissrrsssHtsssssisss-jjsss^s * £ j *2*ssss5g5s*g2gg=!RgRgggs322RS22ggRgRg22R5ii2gggggSgggssggsS *= * T*2Ti"',rf,ft2vt*T ,?fT 2 ;T r^ tT rtfT T ,rs*Tr'('2rcf2rTTi'?,!,r'ri'T'!>TT:^ j a r; ~ s s;i“ B ** t: s a a a ss::s»a5a:sas = a 2 jcas~ a sc g = - * - • • — ® ~ — - c s gSSS82Ssgs22223232c22s3ii32SBSs22Sg2222322222Ss22S5 = ss5 = HS

u ...... - ...... It IiSSSSSaSssggg 325 2S222S2=;S2s83 23522 *? §2222222222222222 222 2S222 2522 2 2 ri S 22s2 siI2SSsi2Ss c : Ss2g 52 g g =

SSCSSCRRRRCCRRRRRSRRRRRRRRSRRR 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 5 ^ s' 55S555525!:SS255;5!!5255S2555 55;ggggS85ggggjgg^ggg5g5gg5g f | 5S3*£E35KS3Es£?E5sE55EE5E = 5s»i53S3c33i553?iaS3i3533ig35sS3? ~

“ ” ~ ISSSSSSaSSSlIlaSSSSSfSS=* aSssSaSSsSESSSSsSSggSsSSSSSSSgSSEisiiiiisjIigsiiiEiiiiiiiig ?. * 1

i l 5335 5555 5 £5 33 55 53 35 £ S3 ££35 5 3 i i ' 8 sf 3 5 8 8 2 85 S 3 35 55 3 3S5S35SS 555 55353 5353555 . 55555 ; 53335 3 3353555553535 35553 233 3355 55 5 SS553S53 33383 *

iilililllilllllillllilllililillllililllilillliliiiilisii^ ?f ’*eiii£332ss55533Es3E553,!',8232333s5523S835553233l:58835a355 ■= |24sr5SSSE2iS|=i£=:=S3S Z ^ n l 00* ! * ^ * 1!22!*22222*23*2 3*5*2*22222222S2SS3S255*2322232SS*255552**322322223222225 ?? 8 I . . | | s SS 2S**sS2SSci£ 35 225255535 223S Sf

B S i * g s *" £ s 23 SsHs § 2 S 5 5 5 2 2 SSSSggggSS 22s 3225 22222322s a 5 222 2222223 2222 2222 2 2222 22222222223522 22222222222 S

363 22222222222222*222 > n £ESS*S5SSP«5E*S2SS K> *nu^u»nM*ui : : s s 8 g *-* ss“ •* a £ ~ «- « *

ks = s.s»sss&!sssS^

vA 315 U * s* aA s *■ s A £ g 2 2 I 31 532s222§ 5 SBsi 8ss222s*s S ’

— y22yWW«PJ*jWO»M>gp»s»MMWK»UWWf»NMWMW>JNMWMWMWK»W»y» w :>ES^S^SSSS^SS8in''SS?iesSSnltCtrS88lSlS •ji*^»«nwwnMM*uun*Ki*M*«4rui*M«*SEn*nnnMAnujRni4*AUMa* y w *• u •> a A m ■» L 4 » U y i A (il U l M n ^ M *" *" » yi ^ X ** m m *» • w ^ © w 3 O M O M ♦ K» — M -r- M -f)NBtflMSONMO**«i»»MWU

rrrsrRKCEssKSssssrrsrmESEESKggsggsisassssassasassi:^<4i«*wM»oi«^»uSwM«oi«a^yi*UM»38” i{0oS5S*S35

• z # 0 8 8 0 0 s s s s g s s » S KI M K| K) M • * 1 a ■* o---L»ur>*roso-«w-^ « eQeeeeSewawSeSeuie S S S 3 S sssssstsss x 5«c * p

a n a O n n O a O Cl r>C a Cl a Cl Cl Cl a Cl Cl a a a a a a a •0 a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a «u 2 • - 2 a a 2 • 2 a 2 a * M M a >o Cl M u M M M N M M a a a a a a a 2 E ft a pa a s E a82i m a 3 S R i2 s 2 p a a n a a a a a a Cl a w a 1 a « « • 1 ColUl a 2 a a a a u a a a A a = - aa a • Ula a a a A a a 4fc * a a Ul Ul a aaa a U» u» IA Ul **a* £ 3 Ul gg a B * w a 3 a a a ga a aa3 a 3 a3 a 8 2 £

nnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn tf 5* fssssssssssssssssssssssssssso * g 3222 222 5 228 52 = 25 3222222*225 as ~ S W M 2 C S WMWtfWVtY t >fu S'fTtTTlfSSSMMUt • * •!i'< * * « i a ] C S S o ^ < B " C S ** " S o x 5 5 5 5 s 5 5 UUU*AAMMMMMIHWUUUUMU|«0****MMN a333»5saax5isSSa5ax5uEa = i3xa5S!

£22 B22 2 5 S 5? § 3 2 a as Ss 32 322S2S23 3823 22 2 8 8 2

3M ******""™™“™2225*5jj5J55*J5JJ2***555255oooSooooo5oBoooooo = s — '3a8£,'Es!Sss*s£2»3SSsEBa£Ss = Bs3g333seE8S»333sBia3EiSs3si " i ” £ 2 * 5l = S = T T J !! = f r ^ f = Tr = fTT?? ?T = = = = ° ** * •“ 0 -Sg»»i''*5!S‘*S®“ « S r 0 " 0 0 "» = = 5S v t 5 ^ 5 ? K i 5 ; ^ 5 ^ ££S££SssSSS£S3ssss£sss£33£S2£S£££S2S£i£iiiiiisiis»iiiis !|

...... - ...... * ...... If SS8SSS 5 s Si ss *i 3338333333 g gS3SS53S333S3 gsSSSsgggSIs 3" g 33383 38 £3 3 S333 g sg 33 sSg a 33333 a 8 glssSSgs 333383333 g 58333§8g33S 333? 1 aO S S2 2SCC2222222C22222222222222222222222222S222 r IT

Pi|i3iis§aiiiiiiiiiiiiii=ii§lil=iiiiiii*iEi ' ? r:vsv:'rvr:“ 2“ :‘'T::K)^:r:7 rrffTffi'TTtrTtTfTtrt g a s = 5 g S “ = S ’- “ - fcS « 5 s - - g « g • SsarjB^BSISSBiS-SiSSBSBSS SsssSsSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS'SSSgSSaSasSSSESEESSS n

s ’ gasi£BSsa§gssssSg8*Igs sssSgg gg§S§5I355gg3 1 §5S sgSsssglsS ss IssssssSssssssssssslsssHs = gSs ggg 5g Sgg g= ggsgsKg gg ggggggggggs ° s nnnnnfionnnnnnnnrtnonnnnrionnrinnnnnnnnnnnnnnwnnrinnnnnnnnnn ff

£SS==£=SS£S£S=SS=S£SS=SSS5SSSESXSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS8SSSSSS ? B3BBsg3sS3SEs3BSSBisS3§EE323SSB33333332383333S3323B333i2 2 2 _ O 2 _ U O U U U U M M M M E» * W W * M » »U«*»*»*WM-U =’’S"~SlSS5SaiSSSSlSS§S5S”SaSSSsSSS = SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSssiisiiissisBSsiiisSSsiisSSgSSESSSS

I!

SS5S SSaSSsSBSsssssSSSSSSSSSsSfiScSSSSSaS Ss SSSSSSSsS E£ SS S3 3Saa33Sa£S£3SSSg 33s s3S8SSS£S£Sa£38SS£SS3 Sss ft 333 b 333 33 333333 3 3333333333333 3 33 8 8333333 *' b Sss 8 33gS5SS£33as33£ 33338£33383sS3Sa a 8 8S3SSSSSS c

222222222222222222222 2222222222222222222222222222222222 f 2 ssssssssrrsssssiiississisisssss^^2 * s S^ssi^-ssssiS&ss^sisssss^i^iii^^siis^is^ss^S^ssi c 2 « ‘r2^-rYT2‘r- “ f =

Ss S is£SSS3sS33S 3ai353g3Ss3SS3S33S£SS3SSS5SSaSS33sS£g E? 3S£S££SS SS S3SS SSSsSiSSSSSSSS SSSSS 8£5£3£ SBSSSSsS E£ S3333333333333333S3333 3S33333S3 833 33 33 33333333 r: £333 £s3333Sg3£s3s£Ss§2Ss£as££SSS3338 33233 S33S3SgS§ c

365 r r v « S&g£33Sgg5S5; 2£ 5 3 5’£2K£KS28<3SS^ *f^y~yy>>»*>»^nnM»h»g>»»yMMnuir>MmMMgMiM — * X s — w» ** — - S:S!38SX8SKSSSSSS!S8 8SSSSS«ESSSIS H

• * 3 S 1 * £ 55 S SSSS s2« 22222 2S222 B| 2 2 55 222* 2S S g g 22252 “* 5555sss55555555s55£55555555555

* a StS:55555tS=S=::======SS888SSS * h

SCSSE^SSSSXpiKSlSlSflMSiiS^li^SSBS YBU*BUk**UMn*»^iaiuuMnnM*u ms ~ * m u * E 5 S ; i isS! = " s i 8 i A i * 8 S ,:,S i ii5 » u - s?:t 5S*SS555gSSSSS25SSSS25S~2i8S = £S5

• «

HH5SSs55SSsH 225S52 * 5 p = *9 « S 3 S 555555s p *

3 iS IS> vC> * e I *» *» ■ u E ^L % ~ 9 r r W ■» T T ■» * ’ ’ t t t *? *1 *5 * * *o s* < * 5 5 5 s A § 5 b* c 5 2 S 5 2 •tta tt^ 8 S • • | IE IE Cl | « X s X * 2 M M M M o c =

as as w *o S 3T si*gE!E£ 5 5 a s 5 a £ £ « - « = 3 367 **>••• -5 -5 ^ **>••• ^ B * N * * 1— ^ 5 c K» s • Cl 5 fe * * fe 5 Cl ft ft £ g . . 1 i = » =i ?, ?, i 3 15 tl *i*El * £1 ‘ ‘ £1 * list *i*El tl 1' a

k» 2 8

C S 3 S £3

(00 113 1(2 * N fe I - i - ! ^ “! 1 I - i - I fe ) 1 1 1 1 1

S S) *s» S) Kl s 7301 •»a»Kjooo«>*a Ul Ul A «5 _ • ' 8 ^ m» 2 S E ^ ( s» 5CM 5 5 V ? ? z * * 1 UPPM LPPN 1 j * > m m ! ! * I fe! : » ? 7 7 B» ^ 'S - * ©

- r a to o

$ r sr * u» "• s 4 P E- 3 r-» *• 4 •i*1 2 1 r

s «9 K s ? iA 9• - 4 * 9 S CM •sJU r r a «o c (M 3 a U 9. CM •9 Psj © a Ul W n 3 S 5a 9 — a 1M CM O aCJ M fJ cm CM Ul 5 f * •o Ul CM s «* SB

P = «* a { « *. p 4 r- ^ 2 , & i a» — «M r E 7 -9 • a

- r a !> _J9 IT ^ 19 19 19 19 19 9 m i a • * t 'C t | S l S K G r< * u a •4 *>0 «y 9 W• M■ IAM ^N NM N Kl • U 9 S S s s * s 3 3 a s * * i s 3 2 3 a t 203 214 203 219 i 3 . -S§ o *5 2 5 1 ! 5 ■o 3 ? ? XI & s 4 - ^9 a «• c a ■■9 m 9 ^9 • a r ar c? g *4 r § £ E a IA

a X B E £ u § ?! U a o E 5 a* 8 a

p r a

«2H '!«• 9 m 5 cm «» a 515 •w a r 2 i£§ a S r a p ~ a e a 5 3 S « a p i 2 222 * m *k *

j* 369

M *W 21 tu'n V l2 V d l*0<«*0 *«*0 *0*0 ^O-'d V ll/! 0-C» T,-* T,-* 0-C» ll/! V ^O-'d *0*0 *«*0 l*0<«*0 d V l2 V tu'n 21 *W M Wl «, (- ,*4 10 , *, IW » pf /pouad jpafl » ( IjW *",0 0,0 1,0 « ,4*|4 (»-J t«-,« Wjl B IIJB MI W j j i , . sfn asPMd M P s a safins , . , , . 1 i 3 1 i e 1 if if 1 e i i I e ! ! e 1 1

2

siif siif ill!! 124 124 in ‘ ‘ *'3 Si ntoS K)S M toSJ KJSi • M(J uK) SJ K)Ul u O o ^N)MK>UU)UUU o KJ kA (J W■ U Ul ■ » ■ CO • u> M U NJ 9« Ul NJ mBBCDBUIN) |«V0tlAO*»*Cfl O oa ro ro ^9 O 3 9» 9ii n 9m "o 9m i ■ m mm i o ar * ■•*» • • 3 •-»•>>— ’>* ■ • • *■* 2 • rr "' J/ J g - g $ & | g tshlli !lf SIEtC^EtEIEKEEE Cl.Ill i E f _ . I « IE III ft ft jft *ft * ft 3 ( i » c »i v « i zi ft'* V l< V * i»* *** "** V 1" ** V '< i m V ' . v **» ¥ «*,a i,« «,i t» t»o ,■ t«-r4 *•»* •"»* 'c* *c* »*-•' ' ? / ” , mft ft ft #ft rfn •ft •ft S§S=!SSSS;^S2',2^?;252!?2SS2SS5!S=!2!sS=1252fs2S25S!;sa N) K) m u U) Ul N> K> m u S3S5S2S - WyUIBIB.-W^OU. — BO ‘UtAUUIOO9i4*«6O'*s4«»NiUi0«A * — — — — — ... . — • • - o M N) o o

5 ? 5 g m <-> r~y C J u •o »« t i m* m 1—4 •« -*« ■. _ r ? ? _____ T ? ■O V T • - O ■

' 2 r ** 8 sag 5a £8 555 ■•« 8 25235*322 SHs 25 a —%X? fr— S** *<« S "SS o 5 MS MS 2 « bt M o1(1 ulkj sKl usKf S sg asSiasiss aiia csii (A SISSSESSs = S ggsssssss S Z *25828585 * K> M M u u u w u Hu u a as z a § a s aa a o 7 r 5 5 5 sa— sW Ms Wa 22 «w * s 5 8 I s a 8s * - a 5 5 s s a s s S5S M M M f K» K* S e S l> e v

i i i i IS SIS n acr> mo> tao> aa> a) ■'l a) o) **i 0) cn ta ~n or> m -n N) Ul Ul m i- fsj M K) Ul M 4b (O to* K) (O N) ^ U O0tff«M4Uls)OD9t*«d*UauUO.*U^0«0«UIUIE0 ^ m u i U|m S ouicaenMco'^rouia“ - . 5 o o ^ ^ Bi ■« ii s "J T) ■ » '^ T *S> ■ ~e ^ >«a 4 ^ to

• X SSS3S 9 5 p - 8SS « 5 p *

a a 2^ E 3

E mr 882882282 5 = 822288882 235525535 s . 5523 2 5 SSSS355Si§sag5S2 EE 88 8S22s2S£38SSS El 88 S2S2SS222bsS8 a: 355555555523555 E P? 68 !t 88 h* 55 9 S m - 9 5 9 *

373

SM 591 375

A A wh 1*« »"*■ i'll *'ll w W rf »*< 3 I » ► t M * Wl *> *■-'■ V l4 l>d» **ap»<»»* V 1* * * - 1*1* 1!/' V l « im^M ** **fM I,* «,«»«,II ^-,1*^-3^ 5 I,* *%* rV» 'c* *£* P0 '* n iJ ! 3!

b n o i

184 170 220

373

w u l 1 * UJ 5gE?|??ip-?g*?fSS •' *f * ’ •* *f * * *?^ g £ -J iiii*isi ilE3lii in in= i = i ii I 1 * fell*- Hill IMIIJJI! in Jin n lBB feilf c* li-! I c*~^ I*"!- 5 * » • it*” *~3 V 1 !/; \* *

g

n S E B S S B S 8 S S M ut» e o o o ^ o £ * s LA I* m ^ • o • s*sEis5issSs s 3 3 8

K l N) M M Kl M K) tsj *• N K) M ^ g 2 2 £ £ £ »g M 0 V 0 * 0 * S m y a a « u e * * u uM KJ *t-li *i-l4 *i-l4 *t-li * + - 'i ■ft ■ft *ift A ft jft fift ft ft 3 1 » » c n » wi *i c*- ?« 381 IU 161 IM i M • « * • «> * • «—■ • ■ e r S • s s a"S5* I • •§!*1 *|i?i *1 ■ SCSfu > * • * e • • T i ut # ■1 » * J m » a 7Z •— t IS g = 2 = =s I ii£f£ 2 i 2 ilsi s safe:£ * e =c ? ? • 5 iLE&f tS iiltf £!:E lit E * *TE £E VfcEti •• • K» 2* - ro • r? ? $ S S o E u " W

=M 55 V I ° i isiisiiii iiisi i

t e S E * i i E ! k ^ E i E i | i i i E i ! : i L E h t : f i c i 1 1 t .1 .1 S E I £ E E E £: E t E t E t 1 W W *** * '»* "»* *'* * **",J E* /pT.!J t+i* t« i+t f< f< ^ V V ¥• *t« *j" "«■ *"z« '+1* ** '+1*

5 5 5 M 8 o u . 2 s s sisBSi 5 5 5 OK> u 5 5 55S555 5 55S5 5

i * « 3*5 8& 8 ssiH s 55 s 2 CSS 5555 5 m* * t£ XS 5 H s I S C i *£ C• re n*>ssESs w 55 £ 5 x V K* *** K>M M K> as) V M K) ° S S Ka x s x « 5 8 g w r M M M ® * tw 3 3 3

384 -ft nft * * W > Vi •,«„ Vi ft ft a i , » c »i " i t ftft zi Vft Nft *** i** 5 55 *3552 55 5i *5255 5*53s55552 5555 i i : t & i £ E s i E & s ; i i ^ M i H H { ! ! i ! ! I ^ I ^ U H ! ^ E ! v i i ^ ! ^ ! ^ ? i C i 5S 22 5 85.525 55

IMII I »J t mu osm »ir Stt»tJ *1 IIAI 0401 tl H s i SS? = •SSSS? =S5SC*** — w35£5!»* «*£ = S5" 22

555252555 u uu * * * * u m ^ ^ «** m ^ ^ ^ ^ m w w t* wi* E ECC» CSCE S85 a

a ui 52555 SSs a

a *8 ^ BBSS sees 5552 K R R K fr fr SS5 BS^ is i

5* is 3 55 3 cc:c:c: si 5555 SB S K g is siis * S '5 S •* M 3S 3S S 3 S I S Z

-e t ??*r : I •r *i E 386

KA F7 (7-9) III KM. KA 12 16-9) II ' os; (d mi •fa »ifa fa wfa fa «fa »ifa fa fa 3 i i » c »i v m 21 tufa Vfa V < i*dp *>*<» "•** V li/« l*» £ i *r.tii ij« fR;v 1,1 «i,ii vn,a t»-,« Ea-j Ei 383 ipi **2*'* *4“ ■|~**3 12 lit * 14

liiiis 555£sss555S555 Hill lllSsiilllism I sr

ii!i? ii!^ s5|iiiii|iiijii %

* I i 21 :I|s* i i i-f si i ?....! j I

•I ss sssSS 5* sS SIIIS Sr IISsSssI » 55551111 s ss I si s? s s s s 5 5s = 1 IssilSsSI 5 ssall *£ s 13 SI 55 s 5 2 5 If i‘ 5 55 i III3 5 I 15 = 11 55 £•223 p= sis *3 s p * §555 si i? sS

?? ? ii 515 5 5 iiiijiiiliisllli I 5 5 5 5 5 ii i m i issgi -'i Brrrrrr-r"--' ?i silliiri;-= pIIrSss^'*liS?i??*5P ~ — *s|s5i5|i«ss5i ’isi;; S =y^^-S£ s - - » -s, - «. - ^ - » = > - Jj. !>;. iig ...j-. | = 5| ? I i. I? - g

I I S S S S S § 5 s P 5s sss s II III 3 ssl s =! 55 Is Is ss §5 55 s 5 IsssssSsils 51 SI ISsI I 3 Is slslssll S 5 SIssSIsSIsS S s Islsl Is IIIIS 5s :I 155555 5ss II I

393

M2 IS2 ISO 176 176 217 110 124 IK II i p

M2 Kl (Cl fe* t II i| 1*** 1*** i| II t *s> ■ fe**“ si e B s B* feJ 6 S i> fci- fif> JJ « * £ ST I * * * jA 1*H «'l **■»« 1*4 11*4 ] I , » t >| f «l Cl tf-'l Vl4 V'4 1*0 0*4, „»4p *4p-*4, *-P *4 Vl/« lO-C« 1CM VPt« 1*» *jl » ZI !,■ «,• *",■ C«-|* t"'3 t" c< 5 '»* *»* "** !C* *

a a * a j * "* *5 i *i- * 5 a N» £ o o 5 5 s ►*» Z? 2 5 5 5 5 a S S B C a a b 5 5 s s s 5 3 a a ^ 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 2 A «s» wi a

2 5 5 5

8 5 » 2 5 5 S a 00 A a a a 5 5 £ t. t. & a t s 55 5 5 55

5 5 *55 55 £ £ S

MS M7 267 & & S 5 «§ 3 a £S***a a U bb £ O O W O t* Wl S M M t» l> S S 401 ».5-4 2030 PPNB '•------srar^gg-gar-gB ' t

^-5!Ji5-S8Sr:J s 3 2 £ S 2 5 S 5 5 5 5 2 ,»«* £ 3 CJD N ?? s i

IfeSgSIJriTISt1 z w t S • i 2 2 P 4 K» •• M N M M a S3 3 3 3 3 •u • 832 3 * 4 # SsSsiis 8 u s a 4 1 1 r s 3 - s 4_ i s * 4* 4 S 3 % X. a 2 T S wa 3a c u w S 3 s s A m m ui m 8» 9 W I/I f> 8 *. t 4u» » s «“ 9 m KJ* lm ^ ^u ue T S i/ ui o o 3 «f ^M ^S M§ K*3 wM P “ 4 5 s g «e I a p *. r- ■» 4 * 7 * s ; a r * fffrrrrriiifri r rrrrrrrr «■?

2S5."s2s?2a§2gaisas|i|2|||

j jt 4 I 4 4 4 NJ N s s 2

u3 *42 w3 w§ y M fs» M o o ui Dt J gS u< § * «s* V

o u* u* u S S S W O w O Ul* O^ O * h* WA O LA oS u ti Ui IW W W w kM u S W* »g© r© w LA 5 u UI 5 «4W ^QKJ4>oiA*<4U**W*UUU o o o o o u* ut o

V* O Oi o o =1 » ^ , !S Is* X ' S o e»S5i 4 5 8 8 = 3 p = E 4 3 23 5 2 « “l P § 5 5 £ 5 £ 5 i 3 2 i * i * A 03

406

408

o 41 41

•2k !»* »l 205 Dm. I t IDE IIII- 1 IV •* 01 *0 215 B u r . if 2 IV .3 list viii-i ::s H u i.4 iiNf vji

4 U

113 117 132 140 133 173

4**0 4**0 V'4 491 0,0 0,0 »«*0 V 1# »0- *4 V £l/. V £. ^ «,« M,* 1|M t„-|N t„-|N 1|M M,* «,« ^ £. V £l/. V *4 »0- 1# V »«*0 1*0 l4 V f M % l0 ***** l£0 •%* ,^p 5 l\ l\ ^ ^ ^ ^ 416 U n S w •^

g 3 r

at •» » •» w p *• p pi *i r-» * ?i £ * m •i r is s 5 as = P a SZ s - s r 3 9n »2 I* s cf s 23 23 as 3 5 ■»»-»■*» * ■ Baa ss s 499 383 793 336 303 417 jf r «» C8C86668&8 S S SSS6 S ^ ^ a a ft *i “■ S '‘sSasssi a * s » s c^ S’5 *o> u Z M ^ w a* ^ •— N M u ?? P s S. *“ j | ]& I K i | E S I I I I i S i t w IJ| g!f *r s(

* a *Ul 4

a *W

9 5 5 t •*# 9 1 JK »* sUl su S U* «• -•*

*

S.

5 a S IS s — €» *r 5 5 a 3B * 3 5 5 5 M « ai^ V r 3-

w m 3 i

«k ♦ s a « * 3 5 w * 4 W M « = 3 IU *

"j, ■* > 3 aa a

r »

* w *

•r>

o

«

81 W i ~JC 5 5 ft*s 9 5 Tg s 3 8 i a a u** 1 M v« *% 2 *£ 5 i w« 3 € A18 F I to en *3 ?^ * £

p » — W U — «s> — •- u ■*■8 3 3 3 8 S 3 SiSSiSit P - 5 2 * ^ SgllSStiiisS*2 S 2 2 8 c ? » X S83yy s 2 3 22 SS2 r r - p « . &S2 22**22 «■ i 22 c s Z § § 3 8 E u * S o t n 8 S 2 2222 5 2233 5 * * ul M m %m 2S m

& £ 2 & f i & & £ 0* 0* 0* in m

* to ui ui >j e a in la «n w• yo o* m i« «<4 hip 5o

333 8 p £ LJ10 m* A u A e u o o if M M N U O9* Ul o B oO S g u u wu * r* ui ui od 3 o » P £ r> uA uP uQ u VI p M M e Ul o 5 U U N> U S * k« » -I UWUUI 2 5 § 5 K> 9 2 P = «r 2 P *

413

130 132 144 4 2 2 t i»* *»* M i* «c* *•[* »**i* 'j Imi, tt-p p-j (t p p p-p (t p-j tt-p « , « »*,i ip mp ip ip *(• »i »i » w *i V k V j i** *** »«*# V * * ** V '* li/> V mji ciji ?

J" 423 e s b m = s • 3 • N • 3 o u tf «.« = 2_

*&:=~illi*EE I 1 “ j Bj | I I IS I J 1“ IB&BEI f & i i S f • I |

\ V 'rf V 'rf »** C**' V *•** t"-J *V *,» 1* ><( t“-1“ 1|» V w *,« V-ll/» f» *** IjM »»* M[l \« 5 Ct 't-' />l»«">M V*j It »l »l *11 » 425 r s i a > ? : a er •® • fc ST fD £ S£S *ZH£ 2 £ S £ S £ £

ei feBI£ECl “1 Cl C* C* * Cl * fcf* | CI * CIIISEESt- I tlc gil El

bt « s * a s a x u 5 5 1 5 5 5 5 c s * 5 c s ci s 5 £

c s s «,N Wj* **,« E«-,* ■»!« j»-3 t l-; 4 5 l/P *»t* l£

c c s r i 5 »l »l » HI II **-*« V d *** M»dp *<»• V EI/' \» *

8 8 «• E » I a m c S s s s i s i K S XMl •c w8 8s i * 426 B 9> ?-

(t> * 9 Ov £ £ £ ?! 5- UD ? ? Z'S S £ i £ 5 i= I »f ABJ If

P * P X* a §g ^ * n » 3 * 2 § a oP »2. at 4“ 3 «> * 233 5 3 3 S P tA 3§ ft - 5 M U •* * 5 * IP « 3 2 s is * 5 " P 5 * 5 S S

§ 3 51 3 E V)» **» g 8 o VB 3w wS 5 2 3 5 s »* E *5 p = «T p = p 5 5 m P R p s' P * ^ ■» E. 6 i E S e £ r = Krf I* 5 * V -

P £ E E E E 3 f? P 3 £ * ** 5 ; • s * i p *4 «

s 3 3 g £ s SSggsS E£ w» u£ E £ pi r 33 a» * ^ UK> MU NUl UK) •Ck «PB o 5 o ut o 3s c s S issss; c * a o e e S e P £ s s 33 -2 33 ?i Si s po 35 p - P = P E P 5 P * P *

*1 *? * i

J* P*H 1^* *11^1 1^1 p ’W*! n 1*11 3 1 1 » C H ¥ *11 II ^B-’ll V*< »"**¥ *»**¥ |**P ***-*< ^ ‘*1'! Pj* IjM WtM IjM ^dP-^! P|H 1|1 tU't* t**'J H »^'l* 5 I*4* ♦ * 't** t * * (fJ(| ,poii»^ /jn

427 A 2.8 A

• ■ cunul ond luttd poitcrinuli o* without or unrtcordiblt tpiphytnl tun on Figure 22.1 429

Log ratio . 9jj . e!i • ♦ o!i . • 6.? 3««n£ I'll

u

4 £ 0 r 23 ure

431 ♦"(U ▼!— ■------■ np.t, @ X

4 3 3 is.

434 c "O -•» JF "O "O p— 435 P P P • * ► ► 5 * uT

Log ratio « 0.2 4 3 6

without or unricordiblt ipiphytiil fusion t -« PPHA ♦» PPNB /• MB 437 l t w e

4 3 8 > ►

439

a ii Itit * Neve Yaa -* Ittiitt Nihil

4 40

Ain G h a z a l M i -

• * criniil ind fund poitcrinuli o> without or unrccordoblf tpipbysul lution R a d u i u s 443

• * cnniil ind fund poitcnniili os without or unrtcordoblt opiphysul full on * £

■n au f)|? j

AAA r % ire 4 4 5

• • * croniil ind fund posteraniali o* without or unrtcordoblt opiphytii) fusion 446

Siahbid + Cehshavar 448

Log ratio

jsh -i S a b z A50

atio aj Firuz Hajji

ZjSl

gure 46 rd fUfuhill +• Hitirrih 4 5 4

Gird Binihtlk