479 FAUNAL REMAINS FROM DUTCH MEDIEVAL TOWNS. A SURVEY Roel C. G. M. LAUWERIER * Summary Résumé Zusammenfassung This paper presents a survey of the Restes fauniques de cités médiévales Zoologische Überreste aus mittelalterli­ present state of affairs of archaeozoo­ des Pays-Bas. Un inventaire. chen Stadten in den Niederlanden. Ein logical research in medieval towns in Cette communication dresse un Überblick. the Netherlands, and deals with the inventaire de la situation actuelle de la Der Beitrag gibt einen Überblick quantitative as well as the qualitative recherche archéozoologique des cités über den gegenwiirtigen Stand der aspects. Much of the information is not médiévales des Pays-Bas, et en traite les archiiozoologischen Forschung in mit­ easily accessible. A signalling system aspects quantitatifs et qualitatifs. telalterlichen Stiidten in den Niederlan­ for archaeozoological data could salve Beaucoup de données se révèlent d'un den. Es werden sowohl quantitative als the problem. The total information accès difficile. Un inventaire signalé­ auch qualitative Aspekte behandelt. accessible comprises 49 studied bone tique des données archéozoologiques Viele Daten sind schwer zugiinglich. assemblages from 22 towns. Although pourrait résoudre ce problème. L'infor­ Ein System, das auf die archiiozoologi­ this information is extremely varied, its mation totale accessible concerne 49 sche Information hinweist, konnte die­ value is in many cases limited by, ensembles d'os étudiés, provenant de 22 ses Problem lOsen. Insgesamt stehen 49 among other things, the small size of the cités. Bien que cette information soit untersuchte Knochenkomplexe aus 22 bone assemblages studied. Since the très diverse, la validité en est limitée, Stiidten zur Verfügung. Obwohl sehr excavated soil was not usually sieved, entre autres à cause de la taille restrein­ unterschiedliche Daten vorliegen, ist comparison of complexes is difficult and te des échantillons d'os étudiés. Comme, der Wert einzelner Studien, unter ande­ the information is mainly restricted to le plus souvent, on n'a pas tamisé, il est rem durch den geringen Umfang des the larger mammals. The article con­ difficile de comparer les ensembles, et untersuchten Knochenmaterials, cludes with a survey of the part played l'information est en majeure partie limi­ begrenzt. Da der Aushub bei den Aus­ by these animais in meat production in tée aux mammifères de grande taille. La g rabungen meistens nicht gesiebt the towns. fin de l'article présente un aperçu du wurde, konnen die verschiedenen Kom­ rôle de ces animaux dans l'approvision­ plexe nur schwer miteinander vergli­ nement des cités. chen werden und bleibt die Information einseitig auf groj3ere Siiugetiere beschriinkt. Der Artikel schliej3t mit einem Überblick über die Bedeutung dieser Tiere für die Fleischversorgung der mittelalterlichen Stadt. Key Words Mots clés Schlüsselworte Archaeozoology, Middle Ages, Town, Archéozoologie, Moyen Âge, Ville, Archiiozoologie, Mittelalter, Stadt, The Netherlands, Bibliography. Pays-Bas, Bibliographie. Ho/land, Bibliographie. The occasion for a survey of the present state of affairs the present state of affairs is in the archaeozoology of of archaeozoological research in Medieval towns in the Medieval towns. Speaking more generally, a survey of this Netherlands was twofold. The first was a minor investiga­ kind is important for two reasons. First, it is necessary as a tion of Medieval material from the town of Tiel which I starting point for research, as a frame of reference and as a carried out some time ago together with an Italian col­ basis for new questions. Second, it serves to formulate a league (Lauwerier and Villari, 1994). The Tiel investiga­ policy for archaeological heritage management. In order to tion was my first confrontation with material from a do so, the level of information must be known, and, more Medieval town. One's first question in such a case is what important, the gaps in our present knowledge. In this way, * Rijksdienst voor het Oudheidkundig Bodemonderzoek (ROB), State Service for Archaeological Investigations in the Netherlands, Kerkstraat 1, NL-3811 CV Amersfoort, The Netherlands. ANTHROPOZOOLOGICA. 1997. N° 25. 26 480 we have a well-argued case for allowing archaeozoology to ent classification of the data. The main reason for the dis­ be contributory in determining the choices which have to crepancy, however, is that a number of badly accessible be made in protecting sites, and, if conservation is not pos­ information sources have now been tapped. sible, in excavating them. The nature of the source of information partly deter­ The second reason for presenting an inventory is that mines its accessibility. The most readily available publica­ this information is not easily accessible, especially for col­ tions are specifically archaeozoological. This category leagues from non Dutch-speaking countries. partly permeates to Audoin-Rouzeau's survey (1993). Sorne of the information, however, is to be found in gener­ Inventory al archaeological publications. Here, the archaeozoological The following selection criteria were used in the data is often recorded in a single sentence or in a footnote. inventory. Although it does not completely do justice to Accessibility is further limited by the fact that information the historical situation, for practical reasons only the sometimes appears in very local publications. A separate towns situated in the present territory of the Netherlands group of information which is of difficult access comprises were included. A survey of research in Flemish towns student dissertations and other unpublished reports. (Belgium), for example, was made by Ervynck ( 1992). Publications written in Dutch hardly penetrate beyond the The pre-urban site of Dorestad was taken as a starting borders of the Netherlands and Belgium. point, and the period concluded with the fifteenth century. There is an urgent need for a signalling system for Although historical sources are of major importance, this archaeozoological information which would enable litera­ inventory has been confined to purely archaeozoological ture which is not primarily archaeozoological and unpub­ information. Another restriction is that the emphasis lies lished reports and dissertations to become accessible. At on site reports. Apart from these, there are ail kinds of the moment Dutch archaeozoologists from various univer­ publications on the processing of animal products, and on s i ties and the State Servive for Archaeological one or more animal groups. Examples are: dogs from sev­ Investigations in the Netherlands (ROB) are attempting to eral sites (Wijngaarden-Bakker and Ijzereef, 1977), fish realise a general archaeozoological information system. and birds from Leeuwarden (Brinkhuizen, 1983; Jager, The major computer networks offer the prospect of interna­ 1983), birds from Leeuwarden, 's-Hertogenbosch and tionalising a signalling system of this kind. Maastricht (Hiddingh, 1983), the tanning of leather in 's­ The quality and value of the information from the sites Hertogenbosch (Prummel, 1978, l 983b) and Leyden represented in table 1 vary considerably. One of the factors (Wijngaarden-Bakker and Maliepaard, 1992), and the sev­ which determines the value of the information is dating. eral doctoral theses from the Biologisch-Archaeologisch The ample dating of the sites at Haarlem l 4'h- J7'h centuries Instituut (BAI) at Groningen that have been written on or Tiel l 5'h- J 8'h centuries very much reduces the value of separate animais from the important Medieval town of these complexes, and ail the more so if we take into Utrecht (Kersten, 1979; Zeiler, 1981; de Jong, 1982; van account the fact that, by their dates, these sites cover very der Hout, 1982). different historical periods. Previous surveys were pub li shed by Prummel ( 1982) The size of the bone assemblage also determines its and Groenman-van Waateringe and Wijngaarden-Bakker importance. There are more than a thousand identifiable (1990). bones of mammals in only seven sites, whereas half the com­ Table 1 shows a survey of 49 studied bone assem­ plexes consists of less than three hundred bone fragments. blages from 22 towns which were recorded in some way or The third factor is the method of collection. In table 1, a other. Different locations in a town, or bone assemblages survey per site and period is only given for the larger mam­ of varying periods have been regarded as separate items. mals found there. The few cases in which data on small The position of the towns is shown in figure 1. In their mammals such as mice and moles was available are not accurate survey, Groenman-van Waateringe and included in the survey. Information on birds and fish has also Wijngaarden-Bakker (1990) mention 19 bone assemblages been omitted. This selection is due to the fact that informa­ from 12 towns. The recently published bibliography of tion on these animais was mostly very scarce or was com­ European archaeozoology by Audoin-Rouzeau (1993) pletely lacking in most complexes. Inclusion of these data in refers to only a dozen bone assemblages from Dutch towns. the table would mean that it contained information which The discrepancy in the amount of information can, to could not possibly be compared. This is because only one­ some extent, be explained by the publication of the results third of the bone assemblages investigated was sieved, and of recent research and, in some cases, by a slightly differ- even then, often on a very small scale. The result is that the ANTHROPOZOOLOG!CA, 1997, N° 25, 26 Section IV: Postpalaeolithic Europe I 481 value of most complexes in clarifying, for example, our pic­ Fig. 1: Map of the Netherlands ture of fishing and the importance of poultry for consumption with the towns mentioned in e Dokkum is minimal. A complicating factor is that at the Eindhoven­ the text. He2 site, for example, the data on material collected by hand and sieved material were not kept separate at the presenta­ e Leeuwarden tion. V arious publications do not state whether material was sieved. This is a hindrance, especially when comparing sites.