Pop Culture’s Favorite Wolf Re-Examined

Posted on by
1

New DNA evidence has emerged about dire wolves, a North American species that went extinct 13,000 years ago. Dire wolves became TV’s most popular wolves after they were featured on the show Game of Thrones, but new analysis has changed their entire species classification.

Much about dire wolves has been unknown throughout history. Fossils evidence of their bones and teeth showed that they were anatomically similar to gray wolves, but 20% bigger. This led scientists to classify them in the same species group as gray wolves. However, a new 2021 study done by archaeologists at Durham University in collaboration with scientists from around the world has proven this to be false. The study examined multiple full genomes, and revealed that dire wolves are evolutionarily very different from gray wolves. Dire wolves evolved in the Americas, completely separately from gray wolves in Eurasia. Dr. Alice Mouton, one of the co-lead authors stated that “We have found the dire wolf is not closely related to the grey wolf. Further we show that the dire wolf never interbred with the grey wolf…Dire wolves likely diverged from grey wolves more than five million years ago, which was a great surprise that this divergence occurred so early. This finding highlights how special and unique the dire wolf was” (Milligan 2021). The fact that there is no evidence that dire wolves ever interbreed with other wolves further highlights how separated they were as a species. 

The research drew on archaeological evidence from a number of places. One of the primary sites for dire wolf fossils is the La Brea Tar Pits in Los Angeles, which consists of sticky asphalt. Predators would follow their prey into the pits and then get stuck there, becoming fossilized forever. However, the pits are not the best preservation site for DNA samples, because of how hot the environment is. In order to get further DNA evidence co-author Angela Perri traveled across the US to various university and museum collections in order to find more samples. The team was eventually able to put together five different dire wolf genetic profiles to analyze. The results that revealed dire wolves to be so dramatically different from gray wolves were shocking to the team. Their hypotheses had placed dire wolves as a subspecies or branch of gray wolves, rather than a totally different evolutionary species. Perri remarked that “I think I can speak for the whole group when I say the results were definitely a surprise” (Black 2021). 

This study answered questions about dire wolves that scientists have been asking for years. But questions around the extinction of dire wolves still remain. Factors such as climate change, competition from other wolves, diseases, and humans could have all contributed. While further research might be able to help answer these questions we may never be able to gain a complete picture of dire wolves. However, this study demonstrates the value of archaeological research in being able to shift entire understandings and perspectives of the past.

Further Reading:

https://museum.msu.edu/game-of-wolves-the-dire-wolf-between-nature-and-culture/ 

https://a-z-animals.com/animals/dire-wolf/ 

 

References:

Anderson, Andrea. 2021. “Dire wolves were real—and even stranger than we thought.” National Geographic. https://www.nationalgeographic.com/animals/article/dire-wolf-dna-study-reveals-surprises.

Black, Riley, Angela Perri, and Kieren Mitchell. 2021. “Dire Wolves Were Not Really Wolves, New Genetic Clues Reveal.” Scientific American. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/dire-wolves-were-not-really-wolves-new-genetic-clues-reveal/.

Grimm, David. 2021. “The legendary dire wolf may not have been a wolf at all.” Science. https://www.science.org/content/article/legendary-dire-wolf-may-not-have-been-wolf-all.

Marsh, Calum. 2019. “Why Game of Thrones Had to Shoo Away Its Direwolves.” Vulture. https://www.vulture.com/2019/05/game-of-thrones-direwolves-effects-difficulty.html.

Milligan, Markus. 2021. “Ancient DNA Reveals Secrets of Dire Wolves.” HeritageDaily. https://www.heritagedaily.com/2021/01/ancient-dna-reveals-secrets-of-dire-wolves/136780.

Randall, Keith. 2021. “DNA Reveals Lineage Of Ancient Dire Wolves – Texas A&M Today.” Texas A&M Today. https://today.tamu.edu/2021/01/13/dna-reveals-lineage-of-ancient-dire-wolves/.

Figure 1. This image from Game of Thrones indicated how dire wolves had been thought to look and how they have been represented in pop culture. New evidence points to their fur having been redder and their ears being rounder. Photograph from Vulture.

Figure 2. A representation of what dire wolves may have looked like. Drawing by Maurico Anton.

 

Remembering Only Champion Racers

Posted on by
1

The striking difference in the disposal of nonprofitable working animals versus their successful counterparts in the world of horse racing.

 

Thousands of racehorses live, train, and race at the Saratoga Race Track in New York  each year. Since the track’s opening in 1863, only five horses have been buried on site (MacAdam, 202021). Used for their strength and speed to compete in sport, racehorses are considered working animals during their racing career. This lifestyle differs from that of a “pet” horse, which in contrast can be thought of as a longer term companion who provides more utility than just their monetary worth (Avles, 2018).

Each of these five champions of the Saratoga track are buried beneath gravestones that emphasize their success in winning races and earning money for their owners. Buried along a walking tour route of the race track, these horses are clearly marked and honored as champions in plain sight to the general public. The memorialization of these five horses creates a bias in the archaeological record towards remembering the lucrative winners through their respectful burial and careful documentation, and consequently leaves behind the horses who were less successful money makers on the track.

The gravestone of Four Star Dave, buried right along the path that is heavily trafficked by eager tourists during Saratoga’s racing season (Figure 1), states his lifetime earnings: a whopping $1,636,520 (Bouyea, 2018). There are no human names on this gravestone, which is one common note amongst both most pet graves and these 5 horses buried at Saratoga. Instead, there is a list of achievements to emphasize that he was good at his job. The focus on monetary achievement is dissimilar to the words of praise for a friendly temperament or silly nicknames found on many pets’ graves, as noted by Gradwohl’s observations of a pet cemetery (Gradwohl, 2000). The pet gravestones typically show an emotional bond with the buried animal, whereas the race horse gravestones are more explicitly focused on the value extracted from their body through work.

Figure 1. Gravestone of Four Star Dave, buried at the Clare Court track in Saratoga Springs, New York. Photograph by Adam Coglianese.

There are unsuccessful racehorses in the industry. Some find another job as a show horse or companion for pleasure, but others are shipped internationally to slaughter houses and killed for their meat (Figure 2). Moving these animals far from where they used to live and race is symbolic of the common phrase “out of sight, out of mind.” There is a clear archaeological record of the successful horses, who are buried in easily viewable locations at racetracks, but a much more muddled archaeological record of horses who have gone down the auction to slaughter pipeline.

Figure 2. An unsuccessful, former racehorse horse loaded on a trailer to be slaughtered. Photograph by Michael Mulvey.

This is a quiet ridding of some unsuccessful racehorses, whether on purpose or through a series of mishaps. The intense contrast in the memorialization of a horse who was paid for by the pound at auction versus the champion whose gravestone is publicly displayed shows the significant disinterest in what happens to unsuccessful or worn out working animals in the United States.

Links to Additional Resources:

Video: https://www.nbcnews.com/video/horse-slaughter-to-resume-amid-foreign-demand-for-meat-44892739553

Article: https://www.visitlex.com/guides/post/secretariats-grave/

 

References

Alves, Rômulo Romeu Nóbrega. 2018. “The Ethnozoological Role of Working Animals 

in Traction and Transport ∗.” In Ethnozoology, 339–49. Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-809913-1.00018-1.

Bouyea, Brien. “Fourstardave: 3 Things Everybody Should Know about the ‘Sultan of 

Saratoga’.” Saratoga Living, July 30, 2018. https://saratogaliving.com/fourstardave-3-things-everybody-should-know-about-the-sultan-of-saratoga/.

Gradwohl, David. May/June 2000. “Parakeet to Paradise.” Archaeology Vol. 53 (No. 3): 

  1. 22-24.

MacAdam, Mike, and Photo Provided. “Horse-for-the-Course Quick Call Memorialized 

at Saratoga Race Course.” The Daily Gazette, July 14, 2021. https://dailygazette.com/2021/07/14/horse-for-the-course-quick-call-memorialized-at-saratoga/.

 

Image Credits

Gravestone of Four Star Dave [online image]. Photograph taken by Adam Coglianese.

https://saratogaliving.com/fourstardave-3-things-everybody-should-know-about-the-sultan-of-saratoga/

A horse being sent to slaughter [online image]. Photograph taken by Michael Mulvey.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/horseracing/2019/10/31/breeders-cup-horses-go-racetracks-slaughterhouses/2485345001/

 

The Insights of Zooarchaeology

Posted on by
2

Figure 1: Excavation of dog burial. Photo by Del Baston.

            Archaeology has been defined as the study of past societies through the remains of their artifacts (Renfrew and Bahn 2018). While many perceive archaeology as one way of discovery and analysis applied to different ancient societies and cultures, there is actually many specialties within the field that help give insight. One unique example of this is zooarchaeology which is defined as the study of non-human animal remains within the context of past societies and cultures (Painter 2016). Past animal remains can give a lot of insight into the environment that humans lived in and more importantly how they utilized it.

            One interesting study performed by researchers at Binghamton University used the trading of venison to better understand interactions between English Colonists and Native Americans in Virginia’s Potomac River Valley in the late 1600s (Hatch 2012). To begin this investigation, Doctor Hatch performed an excavation at a location referred to as the Hallowes Site. The Hallowes site is located around the delta of the Potomac River on the border of Virginia and Maryland. At this location, Doctor Hatch was able to find artifacts and skeletal remains of deer. Through analysis of the remains, it was found that deer forequarters and hindquarters were found in the highest frequency. One artifact of importance was identified to be a bone awl (Figure 2).

Figure 2: Bone awl recovered at the Hallowes Site. Photo by the Virginia Department of Historic Resources.

From this evidence and historical records, it was postulated that this location was used for processing the hunted deer for the parts that would be traded to the colonists. This was supported by there being a very high frequency of certain skeletal remains. Also, the identification of Native American tools confirmed that the site was used by the tribes of this area. One question that was created from this investigation was what happened to the rest of the deer that was not left at this location? Archaeologists thought that the heads were kept by the Native Americans due to the importance of the brains for the hide-tanning process. By keeping the parts of the animals that the colonists did not want to buy, the Native Americans were able to use the skin and brain to create leather and produce a product for them to sell and use for themselves. This study represents one aspect of how zooarchaeology can be used to better comprehend a part of the past.

            Zooarchaeology is just one example of the many specialties within archaeology that allows for different perspectives to be seen and ultimately give a clearer image of the past. With the development of new technology and information being learned, the field of archaeology and the specialties within it are constantly growing and improving.

Links of interest:

https://trace.tennessee.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=5075&context=utk_gradthes

https://trace.tennessee.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=&httpsredir=1&article=2600&context=utk_gradthes

References

Hatch, D. Brad. 2012. “Venison Trade and Interaction between English Colonists and.

            Native Americans in Virginia’s Potomac River Valley.” Northeast Historical

            Archaeology 41 (1): 18–49. https://doi.org/10.22191/neha/vol41/iss1/3.

Painter, Autumn. 2016. “Zooarchaeology: The Study of Animal Bones and How It Is

            Done.” MSU Campus Archaeology Program (blog). November 29, 2016.

            http://campusarch.msu.edu/?p=4531.

Renfrew, Colin, and Paul G. Bahn. 2018. Archaeology Essentials: Theories, Methods,

           Practice with 303 Illustrations. Fourth edition. London: Thames & Hudson Ltd.

Archaeological Survey of Pet Cemeteries Reveals the Evolution of Modern Pet Ownership

Posted on by
2

Sound archaeological evidence posits that dogs were the first human-bred animal; however, for centuries, they remained valued exclusively for their practicality in labor rather than their companionship (Ault 2016). Researchers today largely agree that modern pet-keeping began in Britain in the late 19th century. As researchers search through the archaeological record, increasing evidence shows that Victorians played a prominent role in reshaping historical opinions on pet ownership and human-animal relationships entirely. Though Victorians felt a level of emotional attachment towards their family pets similar to that in the modern day, their displays of such differ greatly due to societal values and beliefs then held (Ferguson 2019). Yet, as beliefs transformed over time, expressions of both adoration and grief over animals evolved as people began inquiring about the role of pets in the household and the spiritual identity of their animal companions (Tourigny 2020).

In 2020, historical researcher and archaeologist Eric Tourigny conducted a systematic survey on four of Britain’s largest pet cemeteries, analyzing stylistic symbolism and language on gravestones to investigate the change in attitudes and perspectives toward pet animals in addition to how those attitudes reflect the ideals, values, and controversies of particular periods.

Figure 1. Gravestones from Hyde Park Cemetery. Photo by Eric Tourigny.

Tourigny’s study of Victorian pet gravestones reveals a general initial hesitance toward acknowledging a spiritual essence within animals, observing that many epitaphs display a reluctance or doubt in realizing an animal afterlife similar to that of humans (Tourigny 2020). Some epitaphs, according to Tourigny, are “carefully worded so as only to suggest or hope for reunification in an afterlife”. Moreover, the vocabulary and information included in many epitaphs of earlier gravestones reveal that pets likely occupied a particular role and space within the family unequal to those of their humans (Tourigny 2020). For instance, Tourigny mentions that many Victorian gravestones contain epitaphs strictly referring to animals as “pets”, “companions”, or “friends”, often only listing their behavioral obedient and loyal qualities. Commemorators also rarely included family surnames when referencing their pets (Tourigny 2020). These trends, Tourigny suggests, portray a time in which pets were emotionally valued additions to households but regarded mostly as non-members of the family.

Towards the end of the second world war, perspectives on animal spirituality and household roles began to pivot. As society became increasingly accepting of religious beliefs going into the mid-century, people became comfortable expressing religious affiliation in the memorialization of their pets (Tourigny 2020). References to the afterlife became commonplace, and religious symbolism began to appear in the designs of gravestones (Tourigny 2020). Additionally, Tourigny notes that a sudden increase in the presence of family surnames on gravestones (see Figure 2) insinuates a general acceptance of pets as true members of the family.

Figure 2. The Use of Family Surnames on Animal Gravestones Over Time. Figure by Eric Tourigny.

Not only does Tourigny’s survey of pet cemeteries aim to understand the transformation of human-animal relationships in recent centuries, but it seeks to understand the influence animals and pet ownership had on initiating transitions in familial, cultural, and societal values. To accomplish this, Tourigny approaches the history of pet ownership through a multi-species archaeological lens by examining how humans have shaped the familial role of pets as well as how pets have inadvertently promoted the individual expression and even re-evaluation of societal beliefs at particular points in history.

To read Eric Tourigny’s research paper, click here.

To read more about Victorian influence on pet-keeping, click here.

References:

Ault, Alicia. “Ask Smithsonian: When Did People Start Keeping Pets?” Smithsonian Magazine. Last modified September 28, 2016. Accessed October 30, 2022.

Ferguson, Donna. “How the Victorians turned mere beasts into man’s best friends.” The Guardian. Last modified October 19, 2019. Accessed October 30, 2022.

Tourigny, Eric. “Do all dogs go to heaven? Tracking human-animal relationships through the archaeological survey of pet cemeteries.” Cambridge Core. Last modified October 27, 2020. Accessed October 30, 2022.

A Purrfect Match – Archaeology of the Domestic Cat

Posted on by
1

When we think of the domestication of dogs, an easy picture comes to mind: humans and dogs hunting side by side. Cats, on the other hand, are shrouded in a bit more mystery. How did these highly temperamental creatures end up in the laps of pharaohs and on the couches of our homes today?

Studies suggest that the relationship between cats and humans began in the N

Felis Lybica (African Wildcat)

eolithic period, with the Felis Lybica (or African Wildcat) moving with early farmers to the European continent. Evidence for this comes from the discovery of Felis Lybica bones in Poland dated between 4200 – 2300 BCE (Sloat 2020). This aligns with the transition of humans to an intensely sedentary lifestyle focused on agriculture. Such a lifestyle would certainly draw the attention of rodents, evident by the many documented accounts of rodent infestation in farming communities. Cats, drawn by the large supply of prey, would have begun interaction and dependency on human activity, leading to domestication.

However, this is not the definitive start of domestication for cats. A study by Dr. Krajcarz was conducted by analyzing the carbon and nitrogen isotopes in bone collagen. It revealed that although cats certainly benefited from human activity (evidenced by traces of fertilizer), much of their diet was still from independent hunting (Nicolaus Copernicus University in Torun 2020). Over a long period, selective breeding would likely turn these wildcats into the domesticated cats we know and love today.

Further east, we can observe the possible domestication of cats through Egyptian art. One of the first artistic interpretations of cats is shown in the tomb of Baqet III, around 2100 BCE, which depicts a cat at odds with a rat (Bileta 2021). This also lends credence to the theory that cats were lured by the rats that surrounded human civilizations. A change occurred around 1450 BCE when tomb art began showing the cats in indoor settings, alongside royalty (Bileta 2021). Cats began to be depicted on or near chairs, suggesting some form of domestication.

A cat is depicted at its owner’s feet. Interestingly enough, all earliest domesticated cats were striped. Spotted cats did not emerge until much later

A shift away from art can be found in the sarcophagus of a cat called Ta-Miu, the pet of the pharaoh’s son Prince Thutmose. The cat was buried similarly to nobles at the time, suggesting that the ancient Egyptians began to regard cats as very important pets. Of course, this is also obvious when we look at Egyptian deities with feline features. Most famous is the goddess Bastet, who was depicted both with a domesticated cat’s head and as a cat herself. Interestingly, Bastet initially had a lioness’ head, switching to a cat as cats gained prominence in Egyptian society (Bileta 2021).

There may yet be evidence that dates feline domestication further back, but this seems unlikely given that cats were not likely to be buried until much later.

 

Links of Interest:

https://www.heritagedaily.com/2020/07/5000-years-of-history-of-domestic-cats-in-central-europe/134187

https://archaeology.co.uk/articles/features/archaeology-of-the-domestic-cat.htm

 

References:

Bileta, Vedran. “Cats in Ancient Egypt: The Wild Companions Who Became Gods.” TheCollector, November 29, 2021. https://www.thecollector.com/ancient-egypt-cat-gods-goddesses-bastet/.

Nicolaus Copernicus University in Torun. “5,000 Years of History of Domestic Cats in Central Europe.” Phys.org. Phys.org, July 13, 2020. https://phys.org/news/2020-07-years-history-domestic-cats-central.html#:~:text=Nonetheless%2C%20the%20earliest%20cat%20remains,domestic%20cats%20in%20Central%20Europe.

Sloat, Sarah. “Cats Chose Humans Very Early: Archaeological Testing Has Upended a Common Historical Principle.” Inverse. Inverse, July 13, 2020. https://www.inverse.com/science/are-cats-even-domesticated.

Pet Cemeteries Allow Us to Understand The Past: Hyde Park

Posted on by
1

By: Aidan Wisherd

At first glance, a pet cemetery may be seen as a place that solely remembers an animal and its relation to a human. A refined archaeological approach develops understanding that a pet cemetery says as much about humans as it does pets. Hyde Park in the United Kingdom is the oldest pet cemetery in the nation and has over 1,000 pet remains (Aridi 2020). Burials display a shifting relationship between humans and their companions, with funerary practice changing from remain disposal to a sustained grieving period in the UK after World War II (Aridi 2020). The relationship between humans and animals, in the form of pets, can be seen in the archaeologically observed monuments and remains.

Figure 1. Grave site of Butcha from late 19th Century in the Hyde Park Pet Cemetery (Rowan 2017)

The UK saw a shift to pet-keeping in the late 18th and early 19th century that gave way for a relationship that included emotional attachment, illustrated through the burial of Cherry the dog. Before 1881, elites would hold funerals or formal burial for pets, but Cherry’s owner asked for the dog to be buried in Hyde Park (Tourigny 2020). Careful observation of the cemetery that has since expanded vastly allows for archaeologists to examine even the shifts in the gravestones themselves since inception. Comparable to human burial ground examinations in many cases, monuments and stones have been moved in the pet cemetery, but much is still able to be revealed. 

The early 20th century assessment of Hyde Park illustrates a shift in familial attachment to pets. After World War II, use of family names in addition to the pet’s name on a monument, as well as references to father and mother, became evermore apparent (Aridi 2020). This marks a greater public display of pets as family members. A similar change in the cemetery’s narratives was the incorporation of religion on tombstone’s, alluding to a deeper level of companionship following the Second World War (Aridi 2020). The cemeteries, therefore, become indicative not solely of how a pet behaved but rather how the pet shifted the behavior of its human owners.

Figure 2. Mr. Twister and Raspberry are buried in the Presidio Pet Cemetery in San Francisco, California with a note from their “father” Ken. (California Pet Cemeteries)

Examining early pet cemeteries for shifts in human actions is incredibly useful for the determination of shifts in human behavior. Archaeological examination allows for an understanding of behavior rather than broad generalities on a pet’s honorary epigraph. Through surveying and excavation of sites, visible shifts in specific cultural approaches to funerary practices for animals can be observed through monuments and grave sites. The assessment must be done that not only does human interaction affect animals that have been domesticated, but that the animals also play a key role in a shift in human behavior. 

 

Helpful Links:

Smithsonian Piece on Hyde Park

Cambridge Article on UK Pet Cemeteries



 

Works Cited

Aridi, Rasha. “Pet Cemeteries Reveal Evolution of Humans’ Relationships with Furry Friends.” Smithsonian.com, Smithsonian Institution, 28 Oct. 2020, https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/pet-cemeteries-reveal-just-how-much-our-relationships-pets-have-evolved-180976153/. 

“California Pet Cemeteries.” RoadsideArchitecture.com, https://www.roadarch.com/petcem/ca5.html. 

Rowan, Lily. “The Secret Pet Cemetery of Hyde Park.” History Daily, 7 Dec. 2017, https://historydaily.org/hyde-park-cemetery. 

Tourigny, Eric. “Do All Dogs Go to Heaven? Tracking Human-Animal Relationships through the Archaeological Survey of Pet Cemeteries.” Cambridge Core, Cambridge University Press, 27 Oct. 2020, https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/antiquity/article/do-all-dogs-go-to-heaven-tracking-humananimal-relationships-through-the-archaeological-survey-of-pet-cemeteries/F44BE9BC2990709675C9A15D340D7F5F. 





Bioarchaeology of Care

Posted on by
2

The bioarchaeology of care is an archaeological approach that endeavors to use physical evidence of care-giving to explore and interpret the details of past behavior, some of which may be unreachable by other means (Tilley 2011). The term was popularized in the research of Lorna Tilley and Marc Oxenham, in which they use a case study to construct an analytical framework to approach the evidence, cognizant of its social context and implications. For the most part, this care-giving is associated with individuals that are disabled or otherwise impaired; this entails limitations to activity and participation in some – or all – of their culture and lifestyle. 

One particular case, that of Man Bac Burial 9, demonstrates this phenomenon thoroughly. The remains of M9 were discovered in a Neolithic cemetery site in northern Vietnam, dating back to roughly 4,000 years ago (Gorman 2012). The physical evidence reveals that M9 was paralyzed from the waist down in adolescence; his restricted upper body movement and immobilized lower body would have required extensive care in all aspects of life, and yet, M9 survived for approximately 10 more years. His survival to that point implies certain things about his community and about prehistoric society as a whole. Firstly, it implies altruism. The care-giving M9 received despite his reduced contributions to the Neolithic subsistence economy indicate that not only was there a surplus of labor and resources that would allow for his care, but also that there was compassion and a willingness in the community to do so. Additionally, there must have been a diverse range of food that would accommodate M9’s unique dietary needs emerging from immobility-associated gastrointestinal issues. M9 is one of the first prehistoric examples of long-term care-giving and survival with total disability (Tilley 2011).

Figure 1: Location of excavation site Man Bac 9. (Photograph provided by James Gorman of The New York Times, 2012).

Figure 2: Modern day Man Bac, cemetery excavation site visible on the middle right. (Photograph provided by Lorna Tilley, 2011).

Alongside with the growth of the bioarchaeology of care is the corresponding debate over its viability. The archaeological evidence under discussion indicates that ancient Neolithic communities cared for their disabled members. The two responses to this are (1) the compassion argument or (2) the null hypothesis. The former believes that the care-giving was motivated by altruism and a commitment to their community members. The latter disagrees, arguing that there is not enough concrete evidence to draw conclusions about community care-giving, rather, the impaired individual must have managed on their own (Thorpe 2016, 93). The two main complications in interpreting bioarchaeology originate in our modern biases. Firstly, it may be irresponsible to retroactively attribute a motive, in this case compassion, to a culture we are completely removed from (Tilley 2011). Second, our medical understanding of particular disabilities is situated within the modern, mostly Western world, which may be completely incomparable to that of the Vietnamese Neolithic (Tilley 2011).

While archaeologists recognize these limitations, they must also acknowledge how the societal implications of care-giving enhance and add to general cultural analysis. The rejection of compassion is unproductive; instead, a more fruitful conversation could be the change of care-giving throughout the archaeological record (Thorpe 2016, 105). Overall, bioarchaeology of care can provide insights on the culture and community of an individual, while also contributing to our understanding of prehistoric society.

 

Further Readings:

  1. Oxenham, Marc F., Hirofumi Matsumura, and Nguyen Kim Dung, eds. Man Bac: The Excavation of a Neolithic Site in Northern Vietnam. Vol. 33. ANU Press, 2010. http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt24hcpx.
  2. Halcrow, Siân E. “New Bioarchaeological Approaches to Care in the Past.” Antiquity 91, no. 358 (2017): 1101–3. doi:10.15184/aqy.2017.99.
  3. https://wamu.org/story/20/06/17/ancient-bones-offer-clues-to-how-long-ago-humans-cared-for-the-vulnerable/

 

Bibliography

Gorman, James. “Ancient Bones That Tell a Story of Compassion.” The New York Times, December 2012. https://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/18/science/ancient-bones-that-tell-a-story-of-compassion.html.

Thorpe, Nick. “The Palaeolithic Compassion Debate – Alternative Projections of Modern-Day Disability into the Distant Past,” in Care in the Past: Archaeological and Interdisciplinary Perspectives, edited by Lindsay Powell, et al., Oxbow Books, Limited, 2016. ProQuest Ebook Central, https://ebookcentral-proquest-com.libproxy.vassar.edu/lib/vcl/detail.action?docID=4771018.

Tilley, Lorna and Marc F. Oxenham. “Survival against the odds: Modeling the social implications of care provision to seriously disabled individuals.” International Journal of Paleopathology, Volume 1, Issue 1, 2011, pp. 35-42, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpp.2011.02.003.

The Archaeology of Horses: The Invaluable Tools in Human Evolution

Posted on by
1

The Archaeology of Horses: The Invaluable Tools in Human Evolution

By: Sydney Cort

           The relationship between humans and horses is particularly unique as they served as much more than just companions for people from the paleolithic period to the modern age. Horses transformed the lives of humans as they served as a means of transportation, weapons of war, a sustainable food source, vehicles which facilitated trade and carried goods, and much more. An abundance of horse bones were found in Eurasia that date to roughly 2.5 million years old to 10,000 B.C years old  (AIA, 2015). These bones were degraded in a way that suggests that they were butchered and this reflects that during early human times, horses were an important food source  (AIA, 2015). Additionally, the value of horses during this period is illustrated as images of them in the form of cave art appear more frequently than any other animal (AIA, 2015). Evidently, the earliest humans viewed these animals as a core part of their lives. 

           As people began to domesticate the horse, they were used in ritualistic and spiritual funerals as a sign of status. In the excavation of the sixth-century B.C. tomb of a Chinese ruler, Duke Jing of Qi, the remains of upwards of 200 horses were discovered buried with him. Archaeologists believe that this is representative of Duke Jing of Qi’s immense fortune and social status in his society  (AIA, 2015). 

           Horses were symbolic of power and societal ranking as they were exceedingly useful in battle. Soldiers on horseback were given an enormous advantage in battle as they were faster, more protected, and being atop a horse gave them a better vantage point and an advantageous position to fight their enemies that were on foot. Prior to this use of horses, chariotry was used primarily for travel and battle in eastern Europe, but chariots hindered soldiers from fighting in certain areas whereas riding horseback in battle was suitable to almost any terrain. Evidence of this use of horses was found in a tablet dating to 1400 B.C that accounts the training cycle and care instructions for horses used in battle and for riding in modern day Syria and southeastern Turkey (AIA 2015). 

           Archaeologists are able to track the domestication of horses through analyzing their bones and specifically are focused on the “bit wear” on the bars of the horse’s mouth (in front of the second premolar) where a bit rests when a horse is being ridden (Taylor, 2020). In the image below, bit wear from this ancient horse being ridden is shown. This method of tracking whether a horse was ridden is not entirely accurate as archaeologists have misrecognized wear on the skull and teeth of horses as bit wear in the past. Despite this fact, bit wear is generally a good indicator of whether a horse’s remains come from a domesticated animal (Taylor, 2020). The process of dating remains and determining the role the organism once played in society is complex and archaeologists have become increasingly more accurate with their ability to determine this information from bones. 


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

_____________________________________________

 

References: 

Archaeological Institute of America, 2015: https://www.archaeology.org/issues/181-features/horses  

William Taylor, 2020: https://www.sapiens.org/archaeology/horse-domestication-archaeology/ 

_____________________________________________

To Investigate further…

http://news.unm.edu/news/research-collaborative-looks-at-spread-of-domestic-horses 

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-021-04018-9 

The Discovery of the Rosetta Stone: The Key To Deciphering Ancient Egyptian Symbols

Posted on by
2

Napoleon Bonaparte is a man who is known for being many things: a political leader in the French Revolution, a prominent military figure, but also, less knowingly, indirectly discovered the first Egyptian Hieroglyphs. In 1799, during his Egypt campaign, a group of Napoleon’s army engineers found a slab of stone inscribed with the same message three times, repeated in different languages (Figure 1). The stone’s inscription consisted of Demotic, similar to hieroglyphs but more casual; hieroglyphs, which were mainly used by priests and in formal settings; and ancient greek. Due to the stone containing ancient greek, something which scientists and archaeologists could already understand, the Rosetta Stone became a crucial component in deciphering ancient Egyptian Hieroglyphs (The British Museum 2017).

Figure 1: A reconstructed image of what the entire Rosetta Stone is believed to have looked like. Retrieved from britishmuseum.org

In addition to its clues regarding human literacy, the Rosetta stone aided archaeologists in the significance of symbols and what they have been used for throughout human history. In September of 1822, Jean-François Champollion expressed his achievements in translating the Rosetta Stone, announcing the different hieroglyphs used to identify non-Egyptian rulers. This discovery, along with the fact that alphabetic symbols were used for both Egyptian and foreign names, was vital in the process of being able to read the stone entirely (Scalf n.d.). 

 

Due to the work of Jean-François Champollion, the stone was eventually deciphered and deemed a decree made by a royal council of priests. The decree is part of a succession of sentiments confirming the royal cult of the 13-year-old Ptolemy V in 196 BC, the first anniversary of his coronation (Scalf n.d.). According to the stone’s inscription, it was meant to be placed in every temple of significance across Egypt (Figure 2). With the knowledge of these sentiments, the stone can be sorted into two different archaeological categories of symbols: establishment of place and regulation of human relations with higher powers (The British Museum 2017). As the stone was meant to be installed inside temples, it provides evidence of the symbolic value the stone holds. In addition to this, rather than solely marking a town or community center, the stone specifically marks places of religious importance, showing its connection to a higher ruling power, specifically royal cults (Renfrew and Bahn 2018, 260). 

Figure 2: An alphabetic translation drafted by Jean-François Champollion. Retrieved from britishmuseum.org

In a society, written symbols are used by individuals to regulate and communicate with people, describe surroundings, organize the whole of society, and pass on accumulated knowledge (Renfrew and Bahn 2018, 273). The significance of the Rosetta Stone revolves around language and, therefore, cognitive ability. Symbols of depiction throughout history provide us with one of our most clear understandings of an individual’s or society’s cognition during pre-literate periods (Renfrew and Bahn 2018, 272). In biology, a human’s ability to use literary symbols is what cognitively separates us from other species, and this discovery significantly bettered our knowledge regarding the origins of more complex forms of language and literary symbols.

Bibliography: 

 

https://www.sacred-texts.com/egy/trs/trs07.htm 

 

https://d1wqtxts1xzle7.cloudfront.net/56165969/Inthetimeoftherosetta-with-cover-page-v2.pdf?Expires=1664729977&Signature=DOssNByuCZxlgccZ13KebpzPL76OKsnJjHpci2AxSE6pqSvtKvbmnyFfG6SUAD-w7T4w60ctaScKlXROVshnHbgG6U3lmGwenpTVIUAMo~tlH-hTd3kD8DkcOl1xEnlqfXuNKmEOKnFF2u7M20gOMv3UzByc5b0oFO8ir6uwejOPhi3lKWV~H9vKX76IycLO6~OutO1ovjBNs8SAezwzuMbvsOZYJKsVzf93KZFFdGxKZk7N0cUqhk~5YPFDX1NVVECYC4UK19fXVcPxfceleb3KY4pvY0IHlegF54BfeQ-g1~hyZJ7uPP6lebL1M1BvcpmjVXrav3RhqPcQQWB5Qg__&Key-Pair-Id=APKAJLOHF5GGSLRBV4ZA 

 

https://media.defense.gov/2021/Jul/02/2002755845/-1/-1/0/ROSETTA-STONE.PDF 

 

References:

“Everything You Ever Wanted to Know about the Rosetta Stone.” The British Museum. Accessed October 1, 2022. https://www.britishmuseum.org/blog/everything-you-ever-wanted-know-about-rosetta-stone.

Renfrew, Colin, and Paul G. Bahn. Archaeology Essentials: Theories, Methods, Practice. London: Thames & Hudson Ltd, 2018: 252-275. 

Scalf, Foy. “The Rosetta Stone: Unlocking the Ancient Egyptian Language.” ARCE. Accessed October 1, 2022. https://www.arce.org/resource/rosetta-stone-unlocking-ancient-egyptian-language.

Community Efforts to Preserve the Presidio Pet Cemetery

Posted on by
2

In a small, unassuming plot of land in San Francisco’s Presidio, the Presidio Pet Cemetery is home to pets owned by military families since WWII (Gradwohl 2000, 22). The cemetery’s unkempt nature contrasts the pristine and orderly appearance of the nearby military veteran cemetery where the owners of these pets lie. Animals like dogs, cats, fish, rabbits, rats, hamsters, birds, and an iguana reside in the cemetery located under a highway overpass, portraying a conflicting message of what this obscure cemetery provides for the archaeological record (Gradwohl 2000, 22). As a San Francisco resident, the Presidio Pet Cemetery has always been an inconspicuous area made unappealing due to its inconvenient location under a highway overpass and its untidy appearance (Figure 1). However, beyond the aesthetics, the history of the cemetery is one of community perseverance and the recognition of animals and their effect on human history.

Figure 1. The Presidio Pet Cemetery in San Francisco, California. Photograph by Jasmine Garnett.

The Presidio Pet Cemetery demonstrates animals’ sociocultural significance in human history and provides a glimpse into the world of multispecies and post-humanist archaeology. Multispecies archaeology is the study of non-human species’ intricate lives and their impacts on human lives, politics, and culture; post-humanist archaeology is of a similar belief where non-human species are analyzed to study the past. By examining the cemetery through a multispecies and post-humanist view, the decorations and emotional epitaphs on the gravestones suggest these animals were loved and provided military families comfort in a tumultuous life. The most lavish graves, belonging to basset hounds Mr. Twister and Raspberry are a prime example as they are complete with large granite gravestones decorated with plants, artificial flowers, small basset hound figurines, mylar balloons, and heartwarming epitaphs (Gradwohl 2000, 24) (Figure 2). 

Figure 2. The ornate graves of basset hounds, Mr. Twister and Raspberry, in the Presidio Pet Cemetery. (Flickr 2008).

While the cemetery is intertwined with Presidio’s military history, it is considered a non-contributing feature in the Presidio of San Francisco Historic Landmark District (Kelly 2015). According to the Cultural Resource Management (CRM), a non-contributing site “does not add to the historic architectural qualities, historical or traditional cultural associations, or archaeological values for which a property is significant” (National Park Service 2002). While the pet cemetery lacks federal protection, the local community has overseen its preservation since its establishment in 1952. Groups like Boy Scouts of America, Swords Into Plowshares, and volunteers of the Presidio Trust have conserved the cemetery over the past 70 years even without the CRM’s protection (Kelly 2015). In 2011, the reconstruction of Doyle Drive (the highway overpass above the cemetery) threatened the cemetery’s destruction, but the construction management team labeled it as an environmentally sensitive area, and the community advocated for its protection as an emotionally sensitive area (Kelly 2015). Despite the lack of federal protection, public and community efforts work to immortalize the pet cemetery, exemplifying how present-day humans can decide what is historically significant – whether or not they are human. 

References:

Garnett, Jasmine. “Dedicated Neighbors Keep a Pet Cemetery and Presidio History, Alive.” KQED. Last modified February 29, 2020. Accessed October 25, 2022. https://www.kqed.org/arts/13875686/dedicated-neighbors-keep-a-pet-cemetery-and-presidio-history-alive.

Gradwohl, David Mayer. “Parakeet to Paradise.” Archaeology 53, no. 3 (2000): 22–24. http://www.jstor.org/stable/41779312.

Kelly, Bryan. “The Nine Lives of San Francisco’s Presidio Pet Cemetery.” Inversr. Last modified October 21, 2015. Accessed October 25, 2022. https://www.inverse.com/article/7246-the-nine-lives-of-san-francisco-s-presidio-pet-cemetery.

National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior. “NPS-28: Cultural Resource Management Guideline.” National Park Service. Last modified August 2002. Accessed October 25, 2022. https://www.nps.gov/parkhistory/online_books/nps28/28appenq.htm.

SmugMug+Flickr. “Mr. Twister and Raspberry.” Flickr. Last modified August 21, 2008. Accessed October 25, 2022. https://www.flickr.com/photos/regency9/2803743974/.

Further Reading:

“Presidio pet cemetery protected”

https://www.sfgate.com/entertainment/article/Presidio-pet-cemetery-protected-3207974.php#taboola-1

“Dedicated Neighbors Keep a Pet Cemetery, and Presidio History, Alive” 

https://www.kqed.org/arts/13875686/dedicated-neighbors-keep-a-pet-cemetery-and-presidio-history-alive