Durham E-Theses A comparative study of faunal assemblages from British iron age sites Hambleton, Ellen How to cite: Hambleton, Ellen (1998) A comparative study of faunal assemblages from British iron age sites, Durham theses, Durham University. Available at Durham E-Theses Online: http://etheses.dur.ac.uk/4646/ Use policy The full-text may be used and/or reproduced, and given to third parties in any format or medium, without prior permission or charge, for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-prot purposes provided that: • a full bibliographic reference is made to the original source • a link is made to the metadata record in Durham E-Theses • the full-text is not changed in any way The full-text must not be sold in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders. Please consult the full Durham E-Theses policy for further details. Academic Support Oce, Durham University, University Oce, Old Elvet, Durham DH1 3HP e-mail: [email protected] Tel: +44 0191 334 6107 http://etheses.dur.ac.uk A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF FAUNAL ASSEMBLAGES FROM BRITISH IRON AGE SITES The copyright of this thesis rests witli the author. No quotation from it should be published without tlie written consent of the author and information derived from it should be acknowledged. Ellen Hambleton Thesis submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Department of Archaeology University of Durham 1998 t 3 M 1999 STATEMENT OF COPYRIGHT The copyright of this thesis rests with the author. No quotation from it should be published without their prior written consent and information derived from it should be acknowledged. ABSTRACT A Comparative Study of Faunal Assemblages from British Iron Age Sites Ellen Hambleton Thesis submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Department of Archaeology University of Durham 1998 The broad aim of this thesis is to further understanding of British Iron Age animal husbandry regimes by undertaking a comparative study of faunal assemblages. More specifically, this involves development of a uniform methodology for comparing published faunal data in order to recognise inter and intra-regional patterns of animal husbandry. Lack of uniformity in methods of recording and presenting faunal data, together with variation in the quality and quantity of information published in reports, serves as a barrier to systematic quantitative comparison. This thesis therefore seeks to develop methods of comparison which utilise the most commonly available forms of faunal data, or convert different forms of data into a single comparable format, in order that inter and intra-regional analyses of the widest possible dataset can be undertaken. To ensure viable comparisons unaffected by small sample bias, only those sites with total cattle, sheep and pig assemblages of NISP>300 or MNI>30 are included in this study. Analyses concentrate on the three main domestic species (cattle, sheep, and pig) which comprise the bulk of all faunal remains recovered from excavations of British Iron Age sites, and utilise three main types of information: Firstly, representation of different skeletal elements is examined in order to recognise the effects of taphonomic and human alteration on each assemblage. Secondly, quantification data for cattle, sheep, and pig is compared, using tripolar graphs to establish the relative importance of different species in each assemblage. Thirdly, mandibular tooth wear data is used for the composition of mortality profiles to compare herd management strategies. Both species proportions and mortality profiles from different faunal assemblages are compared, and examined for any inter and intra-regional similarities. Subsequendy assemblages are examined for relationships between patterns of species proportions and/or mortality profiles and particular site characteristics (topographical location, underlying geology, settlement type, and date). Finally, using the results of these analyses, suggestions are made as to the nature of animal husbandry regimes in different regions, and the factors influencing choice of husbandry strategy in Iron Age Britain. "So I prophesied as I was commanded: and as I prophesied there was a noise, and behold a shaking, and the bones came together" Ezekiel 37:7 Contents Acknowledgements vn List of figures vni List of tables XI Chapter 1 Introduction 1 • Iron Age settlement archaeology and agriculture 1 • Climate and Crops 3 • Justification and aims of research 4 Chapter 2 Comparative regional investigations of Iron Age animal 6 husbandry: a review of the literature • Previous approaches 7 • Previous Studies 15 • Summary 18 Chapter 3 The Iron Age dataset and introduction to methods of 19 analysis • Problems in faunal analysis 19 • The faunal dataset 22 • Site characteristics 25 • Methods of analysis 31 Chapter 4 The representation of skeletal elements in Iron Age faunal 36 assemblages • The potential of skeletal element representation as a source of 36 archaeological information • Problems in the study of skeletal element representation 41 • Methods of analysing skeletal element representation 43 • Treatment of skeletal element representation in Iron Age faunal reports 46 • Analysis of the Iron Age data 47 • Iron Age skeletal element representation: conclusions and 55 recommendations Chapter 5 Quantification of faunal remains 57 • Uses of quantified faunal data 57 • Methods of Quantification 58 • Availability of NISP, MNI and MNE data 62 • Comparability ofNISP, MNI and MNE data 64 • Sample size 68 IV Chapter 6 Species proportions in Iron Age faunal assemblages 72 Introduction 72 Methods 72 British Iron Age Species Proportions 78 Region 80 Geology 86 Topographical Location 91 Site Type 95 Date 100 Conclusions 105 Chapter 7 Ageing of Iron Age domesticates 107 • Uses of age data 107 • Methods of Ageing 108 • Two methods of ageing from dental wear: the advantages and limitations 110 for comparative study of Iron Age faunal material. Chapter 8 Method for converting the results of different analyses of 114 mandibular tooth wear into a similar format. • Aim 114 • Method 114 • Results 116 • Testing the method. 117 • Discussion and Conclusion. 121 Chapter 9 Mortality profiles of Iron Age domesticates 122 Sample size 122 Comparability of tooth wear data derived from different methods 123 Pig 124 Sheep 126 Sheep: regional analysis 132 Sheep: site characteristics 135 Cattle 142 Cattle: regional analysis 147 Cattle: site characteristics 150 Conclusions 156 Chapter 10 Summary/Discussion: Animal Husbandry regimes in Iron 157 Age Britain • Regional Patterns 157 • Future work 165 Chapter 11 Methods: evaluation and future direction 168 • Identification of trends and outliers 168 • Published data: Limitations and recommendations 169 • Use of methods outside the British Iron Age 173 Summary 175 Bibliography 176 Appendix 1 Information available in published Iron Age faunal reports 187 Appendix 2 Site characteristics and species proportions of Iron Age 190 faunal assemblages Appendix 3 Representation of different skeletal elements in Iron Age 195 fauna assemblages Appendix 4 Mortality profiles based on tooth wear data 225 Appendix 5 Reading Tripolar Graphs 245 VI Acknowledgements I am indebted to the following for their contributions to this research: My supervisors, Colin Haselgrove and Peter Rowley-Conwy, for providing a wealth of knowledge, enthusiasm, and patience. Sue Stallibrass and Dale Serjeantson for their helpful insights into the subject matter, and Sue for her guidance on the analysis of the Port Seton assemblage. Mark Robinson and Bob Wilson for their help with access to, and comprehension of, the Upper Thames Valley faunal archive. Also, James Rackham for making available unpublished data from Stanwick. My parents for their continued love and support throughout. Duncan for giving his best and taking my worst. All my family and friends, particularly Rosie, Paul, and Room 001, for precision application of encouragement, nagging, and welcome distractions. NERC for flmding the project. Many Thanks. vn List of Figures Chapter 2 Figure 1: Map of Britain depicting Fox's (1938) 'Highland' and 'Lowland' zones. Figure 2: Map of Britain depicting Regions covered by Piggott's (1958) 'Stanwick' and 'Woodbury' cultures. Figure 3: Map of Britain depicting Cunliffe's (1991) model of the distribution of different Iron Age agricultural economies. Chapter 3 Figure 4: Model of the taphonomic history of a faunal assemblage (after Meadow 1981). The decreasing size of the symbol (from top to bottom) denotes the loss of information through taphonomic time. Figure 5: Map of Britain depicting geographical regions and location of sites used in this study. Chapter 4 Figure 6: a) Percentage survival of parts of goat skeletons from the Kuiseb River villages b) Percentage survival of parts of bovid skeletons from Makapansgat. (after Brain 1981) Figure 7: Percent MNI of the Star Carr red deer compared with caribou from three types of Nunamiut Eskimo sites: a) Kill-butchery sites b) Residential base camps c) Hunting camp, (after Legge & Rowley-Conwy 1988) Figure 8: Patterns of skeletal element representation in three Iron Age cattle assemblages using MNI method: a) with separate proximal and distal long bone elements b) with whole bone elements Figure 9: Representation of skeletal elements from different Iron Age cattle, sheep, and pig assemblages: a) using MNI method b) using NISP method. Figure 10: Representation of skeletal elements in two Iron Age cattle assemblages illustrating the differences