The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

Faunal analysis : studies in the analysis and interpretation of animal bones from large multi-phase archaeological excavations

Faunal analysis : studies in the analysis and interpretation of animal bones from large multi-phase archaeological excavations
Faunal analysis : studies in the analysis and interpretation of animal bones from large multi-phase archaeological excavations

The archaeological background to economic archaeology is discussed and the role of faunal analyses in such studies is assessed. A case is made in favour of a unified `multidimensional' approach to the faunal material from archaeological sites. A set of terms is introduced and defined by means of which it is possible to derive an analytically useful model of assemblage formation processes. Two of these, which are crucial to the understanding of assemblage formation, are the `shape' (composition) and `scale' of a population of animal bones. A method is devised for standardising assemblage composition data with respect to scale whilst maintaining patterning manifested as shape. This model is employed in the analysis of the bones from recent excavations at Neolithic Knossos (Crete) and bronze age Phylakopi (Melos). It is demonstrated that the interpretation of the Knossos assemblage presented by Jarman and Jarman (1968) is disputable. Evidence is presented that no demonstrable changes in animal husbandry were evidenced at Knossos throughout the neolithic, although the bones may have been subject to gradual attrition, probably by the percolation of soil solutes and the weight of sediments. It is also argued that Furness' (1953) conclusions on the ceramic material and Evans' (1964 et seq.) interpretation of the archaeological evidence based on Furness' revision are equivocal. The Melian material is shown to be similarly uniform and the apparent increase in the relative abundance of cattle (Gamble 1982) is at least partly attributable to taphonomic factors. Evidence is presented that the bulk of the material results from the action of large scale refuse disposal and that the contexts in which behaviourally or taphonomically differentiated assemblages are recovered are those which are quickly and purposively sealed and consequently produce comparatively little material. The use of statistics in the interpretation of archaeofaunas is discussed and guidelines for their application and interpretation are presented in terms of the causes and effects of archaeozoological variation. It is concluded that the case in favour of a multidimensional approach to faunal analysis is overwhelming. (D73647/87)

University of Southampton
Winder, Nick Peter
Winder, Nick Peter

Winder, Nick Peter (1986) Faunal analysis : studies in the analysis and interpretation of animal bones from large multi-phase archaeological excavations. University of Southampton, Doctoral Thesis.

Record type: Thesis (Doctoral)

Abstract

The archaeological background to economic archaeology is discussed and the role of faunal analyses in such studies is assessed. A case is made in favour of a unified `multidimensional' approach to the faunal material from archaeological sites. A set of terms is introduced and defined by means of which it is possible to derive an analytically useful model of assemblage formation processes. Two of these, which are crucial to the understanding of assemblage formation, are the `shape' (composition) and `scale' of a population of animal bones. A method is devised for standardising assemblage composition data with respect to scale whilst maintaining patterning manifested as shape. This model is employed in the analysis of the bones from recent excavations at Neolithic Knossos (Crete) and bronze age Phylakopi (Melos). It is demonstrated that the interpretation of the Knossos assemblage presented by Jarman and Jarman (1968) is disputable. Evidence is presented that no demonstrable changes in animal husbandry were evidenced at Knossos throughout the neolithic, although the bones may have been subject to gradual attrition, probably by the percolation of soil solutes and the weight of sediments. It is also argued that Furness' (1953) conclusions on the ceramic material and Evans' (1964 et seq.) interpretation of the archaeological evidence based on Furness' revision are equivocal. The Melian material is shown to be similarly uniform and the apparent increase in the relative abundance of cattle (Gamble 1982) is at least partly attributable to taphonomic factors. Evidence is presented that the bulk of the material results from the action of large scale refuse disposal and that the contexts in which behaviourally or taphonomically differentiated assemblages are recovered are those which are quickly and purposively sealed and consequently produce comparatively little material. The use of statistics in the interpretation of archaeofaunas is discussed and guidelines for their application and interpretation are presented in terms of the causes and effects of archaeozoological variation. It is concluded that the case in favour of a multidimensional approach to faunal analysis is overwhelming. (D73647/87)

This record has no associated files available for download.

More information

Published date: 1986

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 460664
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/460664
PURE UUID: fd09c8e8-7c2c-48f1-b643-372836b2eea2

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 04 Jul 2022 18:26
Last modified: 04 Jul 2022 18:26

Export record

Contributors

Author: Nick Peter Winder

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×