Arkadiusz Marciniak

Institute of Prehistory, Adam Mickiewicz University in Poznan

People and animals in the early Neolithic in Central Europe. New approach to animal bones assemblages from farming settlements

Introduction  

This paper is explicitly aimed at overcoming the ‘economic’ bias of European archaeozoology. I want to focus on the social context of animal use by recognizing that animals were maintained and consumed in ways that accented social relationships, such as those creating identity, highlighting ancestry, inequalities, importance of gender, negotiating social roles, links, and evaluating and/or maintaining social status. Social factors influence particularly the following kind of animal patterns: the use of domestic vs. wild animals, carcass distribution, food preparation, and discard.

When one look at archaeological literature over the last few decades addressing the role of animals in prehistoric society, one is to be surprised at how easily animal bone assemblages are incorporated in models relating to herd management, subsistence, nutrition, and adaptation. The faunal remains, being debris of certain activities, were usually regarded as the patterned residues of these activities, but were treated as representation of the economic system that structured these activities (see Barrett 2000:63). Consequently, the studies of prehistoric fauna were focused on the larger scale that is more distanced from the archaeological record. Small-scale events were given little interest and all of them were explained by long-term changes.

Archaeological and faunal materials

I would like to discuss here a couple of examples from early and late Danubian tradition in Central Europe, more specifically the Band Pottery Culture from Kujavia region in the North European Plain. The early phase of the LBK complex is characterized by remarkable uniformity over vast geographic distances. This is most notable in the case of distinctive timber rectangular longhouses, pottery, polish stone adzes and chipped stone assemblages. The dominant scenario of the LBK phenomenon stresses that these groups were the first agricultural communities in the area of Central Europe settled on loesses or other fertile soils. These groups present homogeneous socio-cultural system, formed and undergoing transformations in the zone of spread of an agricultural economy from the „Near East centre” (e.g. Bogucki 1988).

The end of early Neolithic, namely the later stage of the LBK, was characterized by expansion of farming communities into new areas and both large trapezoidal houses and big settlements accompanied this process. The process of constructing small communities was of local character and carried out relatively independently as part of a wider tendency characterized by the convergent development. This does not necessarily mean that these groups lived in isolation. On the contrary, they drew from the richness of their cultural tradition, mainly Danubian Neolithic, in order to construct their own identities, ancestry in a unique and specific way. Longhouses and its attendant material culture as well as cattle were the means through which the first lowland Neolithic communities of the central European woodlands were created (see more in Marciniak 2000).

The analysis is based upon 6 settlements from the early Band Pottery Culture (Bożejewice, site 22; Łojewo, site 35; Miechowice, site 7; Radojewice, site 29; Siniarzewo, site 1; and Żegotki, site 2) and 4 settlements from the late Band Pottery Culture (Kuczkowo, site 5; Siniarzewo, site 1; Węgierce, site 12; and Żegotki, site 3). All of them come from Kujavia region in central Poland. In total, 16,436 animal bones were collected and 9,413 (57,3%) of them were identified. 11,530 (70,2%) bones come from the earlier period while 4906 (29,8%) from the later period. I have chosen for the analysis only those settlement sites, which contained a considerable number of animal bones and were properly excavated and the material was properly recorded. It is required that all archaeological and faunal data to be attributed to given strata and/or feature which make statistical and contextual analyses possible. 

Methods 

The most appropriate strategy, in which the social dimension of human-animal relationships in prehistoric farming communities can effectively be addressed, is analysis and interpretation of horizontal distributions of skeletal parts, both within a given settlement and microregion. It provides an information about functional utilization of animals and their parts in different places within the settlement and allows us to get into the social dimension of animal exploitation. Furthermore, the context in which bone materials are deposited is directly responsible for their preservation. It also enables us to recognize a group predilection toward a particular method of refuse disposal. This should be prerequisite of all analyses before we pursue this any further. This kind of analysis has to be supplemented by the study of the context of other features such as dwelling structures, burial ground and numerous archaeological data.

The observed distribution of anatomical parts in archaeological context is a result of potentially complex set of cultural and natural processes. Thus, it is necessary to discern the impact of these factors upon observed frequency of anatomical parts. They provide ‘frames of reference’ in searching of explanations for the frequencies of skeletal parts composition. Some of them are based upon results of actualistic studies, but they do not draw out all potential causes. The analysis of collected data comprised: (1) a correlation between density and body part representation (Lyman 1984), (2) a correlation between the Modified General Utility Index (Binford 1978) and body part representation, (3) a correlation between the Marrow Index (Binford 1978) and body part representation. The results made then possible to look at (4) anatomical body part distribution, and then (5) species composition.

            An impact of depositional and postdepositional factors upon faunal materials has been widely studied and discussed in the literature (e.g. as summarized recently by Lyman 1994). The scope of these transformations is often considerable and it has been shown that a given assemblage might have been formed by other factors, e.g. natural than those which supposedly should have been reflected in studied deposits. The differential preservation might depend upon bone density. Thus, the study of density driven attrition can be a valuable factor in assessing whether the observed variability is caused by differential density of particular anatomical parts. In order to discern this pattern a correlation between the frequency of each skeletal part and the structural density values was calculated. I have used for this calculation a structural bone density of deer (Odocoileus spp.) and sheep (Ovis aries) bones as measured by Lyman (1984), and North American bison (Bison bison) measured by Kreutzer (1992).

            The analysis of frequencies of skeletal parts is often aimed at recognition of various strategies of human use of food. The tools for such studies were provided by Binford (1978) who measured amount of meat (weight of fat and muscle tissue) and marrow (marrow cavity volume multiplied by the percentage of fatty acids in the marrow) of particular skeletal parts of two domestic sheep (Ovis aries) and one caribou (Rangifer tarandus). This led to the calculation of food utility indeces of the anatomical parts (see detailed calculation of indices in Binford 1978:74). In order to discern these relations in analyzed assemblages a correlation between the Modified General Utility Index and the Marrow Index for anatomical parts and frequency of these fragments was calculated. Values for sheep and caribou, as proposed by Binford (1978), were used.

Analysis of anatomical part representation was proceeded by categorization of animal body into 7 categories based upon proposal by Stiner (1991; see there for more details) with futher modifications: (1) horn/antler, head, neck, (2) axial column below the neck, (3) upper front limbs, (4) lower front limbs, (5) upper hind limbs, (6) lower hind limbs, and (7) feet.

Results           

Analysis of studied materials reveals lack of correlation, calculated by Spearman’s correlation coefficient, between bone density of anatomical parts and frequency of these fragments, both in the early and late Band Pottery assemblages. In some cases, statistically significant negative correlation between these two variables was observed. This means that the most numerous bones in this assemblages are those that are the most fragile. Taphonomic processes mediated by the structural density of the skeletal parts had not influenced the frequencies of skeletal parts. Thus, one could conclude that the observed frequency of bones was not caused by factors acting upon an assemblage after bones were deposited. It was rather a result of cultural factors prior to its deposition, namely an intentional deposition of particular segments of animal bodies. 

A correlation between the Modifed General Utility Index and the Marrow Index, and body part representation was calculated using Spearman’s correlation coefficient for all settlements sites as well as all features where number of animal bones made such an analysis statistically valid. Analysis was conduced for cattle, sheep/goat, and pigs only as other species were represented by such a small number of bones that analysis of this type proved to be impossible.

In the early LBK assemblages, there was no statistically positive correlation between the Modified General Utility Index and body part representation for analyzed species, both for particular settlements and features/strata at these sites. There was only one exception, namely a significant positive correlation between these two variables for cattle at feature 153 at Bożejewice, site 22. Situation is rather similar in the late phase of the LBK. Generally, there is no significant positive correlation between these two variables for whole sites, while there are some discrepancies in particular features. In only three cases out of 43 this correlation was positive and significant. In two of them it referred to pig (feature 32 and the whole site at Żegotki) and one to cattle (feature 1, layer 1 at Węgierce). These results show that the domesticated animals in the LBK, both in its early and late phases, were not in the first place used according to contemporary nutritional standards.

Similarly to the Modified General Utility Index, in majority of the early LBK assemblages there was no significant correlation between the Marrow Index and body part representation irrespective of the context from which the bones come from. However, in 15 cases (out of 54) this correlation was positive and significant and it referred both to cattle (8 cases) and sheep/goat (7 cases). Analysis of data from the late LBK reveals also a general lack of correlation between these two variables. However, a number of cases, in which this relationship is positive, are smaller than in the early LBK. This was only observed in 5 cases out of 28 and characterized both cattle and sheep/goat. Analysis of the values of the correlation coefficients of particular species in the same features reveals considerable differences between different features and their content existing at the same sites of the late LBK. To sum up, a general lack of correlation confirmed previous observation that domesticated animals in the LBK, both in its early and late phases, were not used according to contemporary nutritional standards but consumption of marrow was considerable.

Having analyzed theses three ‘frames of reference’, offered by actualistic studies, in searching of explanation of the frequencies of skeletal parts it is necessary now to look at the body part representation itself. Closer look at data from the early LBK for cattle reveals very uniform pattern that can be called leglessness. It is characterized by a firm predominance of the first two anatomical categories (see previous chapter), namely: horn/antler, head, and neck, and axial column below the neck (fig. 1). Limb bones, both front and hind, as well as feet bones are represented in small numbers. The pattern is almost identical both for particular settlements and features/strata at these sites and existing deviations are small. They can be seen e.g. at Bożejewice site 22, feature 153. The most different pattern is observed at Radojewice, site 29 and Siniarzewo, site 1.

fig. 1

The pattern for sheep/goat differs considerably from cattle what is shown in more numerous and differentiated          frequency of leg bones (fig. 2). Additionally, there are differences among settlements and particular features. The pattern for pig is closer to cattle than to sheep/goat, however it lacks the regularity observed for cattle. Interestingly, deposition of body parts of particular species was different in the same feature e.g. body parts for cattle were considerably different than those of sheep/goat.

fig. 2

  The body part distribution pattern for the late LBK is more complex. With regard to cattle, one can distinguish three general patterns: (1) a firm dominance of head/neck bones and axial column below the neck resembling the pattern from the early phase, (2) predominance of head/neck bones with small and very similar representation of other anatomical categories, (3) equal representation of all categories except for feet. Particular body fragments appear also in other configurations (fig. 3). All these patterns can be traced at the same settlement in its different features. Thus, one can conclude that importance of cattle and deposition patterns of these bones were considerably varied.

fig. 3

  The distribution of sheep/goat body parts was also varied, however it was different than that of cattle except for one case. The following patterns can be discerned: (1) a firm predominance of head/neck bones and axial column below the neck resembling the cattle pattern from the early LBK (these proportions, however, are not that regular like in cattle), (2) predominance of head/neck bones with small representation of other categories – this is the most dominant, (3) dominance of one of two other anatomical segments.

Body part representation of pigs from the late LBK is characterized by predominance of head/neck bones and axial column below the neck (fig. 4). This is relatively regular and is similar to part distribution of cattle from the early LBK. Other proportions were also observed namely a dominance of head/neck bones and lower front limbs or predominance of lower hind limbs. One has to remember, however, that these bones are not numerous, and thus the results might not be representative for the whole period.

fig. 4

The last analytical step comprises species composition. The most frequently represented species at the LBK settlements is cattle. Cattle bones comprise about 90% or more of all bones. Cattle were followed by sheep/goat. Other domesticated species such as pig are rarely represented, and their number is not higher than bones of wild animals. Wild animals, such as deer, roe deer, aurochs, wild boar are rarely represented. These proportions are almost identical at all analyzed settlements as well as particular features and stratas in these features. 

            The species composition at the late LBK settlements is not that uniform. While cattle were the dominant species at all settlements, composition of species in particular features was considerably differentiated. In some of them, we observed dominance of cattle followed by sheep/goat and then pig, which is identical to the early phases of the LBK; in others sheep/goat dominated followed by cattle and pig or alternatively dominance of pig was observed followed by sheep/goat and then cattle. In other features, number of cattle bones is equal to number of sheep/goat bones. Generally, the number of pigs increased and they became much more popular than in the early phases.

Discussion

Animals, especially cattle, were the very basis for maintaining and creating group’s identity as well as security in a new ‘frontier’ situation and unknown environment. A commonly shared opinion that the early cattle exploitation was meat focused is completely unjustified and has to be rejected. Cattle became an important social resource and when killed, provided food for ceremonial practices (Thomas 1999:74). These animals were probably slaughtered around longhouses, but ‘communal feasting facilities’ might have existed outside longhouses, and it is where food was consumed. Wild animals were slaughtered outside of longhouses and possibly consumed at the ridge of the settlement or outside.

Analysis of anatomical distribution shows considerable similarity of cattle and pig that clearly differs from sheep/goat. At the same time, anthropological accounts show that mutton is universally eaten and is not a subject of any taboo as pork or beef (Ryder 1984:194). In the early Neolithic sheep/goat was consumed in an ordinary fashion and this consumption was not regulated by ideology. At the same time, the use of pig as a meat animal has to be questioned.  I would argue that peculiar way of treating of pigs and cattle (developed later in the form of sophisticated cultural and religious regulations) have begun as early as the beginning of the Neolithic.

Taphonomy analysis reveals lack of weathering of early Neolithic bones, which implies that bones were directly deposited in pits and that the early LBK sites were thoroughly cleaned. On the other hand, the late LBK faunal remains reveal large number of weathered bones indicating their long presence on the surface before the final deposition. This supports some indications that interiors of long houses in the early Neolithic in Central Europe were cleaned out (Milisauskas 1986:117), and refuse deposited in pits around houses. However, later phases of the Danubian tradition are characterized by removing a dirt far from the houses. The rubbish was clearly separated from the house and deposited towards the edges of the settlement (e.g. in Inden-Lamersdorf) (Hodder 1990:128).

More generally, it seems that communal identity was of crucial importance for the early LBK communities. The communities were of egalitarian character with consensual decision-making. A village/settlement was the basic social unit creating definable groups. In the late LBK household became a basic social entity and it is discernible archaeologically in the form of household clusters that comprise house, human graves, storage facilities and rubbish pits. 

             The period of construction of identity and descent involved mobilization of external cultural resources like the cattle, the idea of house, and exotic resources such as flint and copper. Cattle as well as houses had the potential to bring a world into being and continually reproduced human relations in and with that world. The historical trajectory of the Kujavia region caused cattle and longhouse to became a „cultural object” incorporating an „extended” form of signification (Giddens 1987:100) and a means for creation of identity of early farmers. This early phase was later replaced by the period of stabilization when the common identity was set up and configuration of previously mobilized and further recontextualised resources provided conceptual means for these groups.

References:

Barrett, J.C. 2000. A thesis on agency. In: Dobres M.-A. & Robb J. (eds), Agency in archaeology. Routledge, London and New York, pp. 61-68.

Bogucki, P 1988. Forest farmers and stockherders. Early agriculture and its consequences in North-Central Europe. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Binford, L.R. 1978. Nunamiut ethnoarchaeology. Academic Press, New York.

Giddens, A.1987. Social theory and modern sociology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Grygiel, R. & Bogucki, P. 1997. Early farmers in north-central Europe: 1989-1994 excavations at Osłonki, Poland.  Journal of Field Archaeology 24:161-178.

Hastorf, C. A. 1991. Gender, space and food in prehistory. In: Gero J.M. & Conkey W.M. (eds), Engendering Archaeology. Women and Prehistory. Basil Blackwell, Oxford, pp. 132-158. 

Hodder, I. 1990. The domestication of Europe: structure and contingency in Neolithic societies. Blackwell, Oxford.

Hodder, I. 1997. Architecture and meaning: the example of Neolithic houses and tombs. In: Parker Pearson M. & Richard, C. (eds), Architecture and order. Approaches to social space. Routledge, London and New York.

Kreutzer, L.A. 1992. Bison and deer mineral densities: comparisons and implications for the interpretation of archaeological faunas. Journal of Archaeological Science 19: 271-294.

Last, J 1996. Neolithic houses - A Central European perspective. In Darvill T. & Thomas J. (eds), Neolithic houses in Northwest Europe and beyond, pp.  27-40.

Lyman, L.R. 1984. Bone density and differential survivorship of fossil classes. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 3:259-299.

Lyman, L.R. 1994. Vertebrate taphonomy. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Marciniak, A. 2000. Living space. Construction of social complexity in Central European communities, In: Richie A. (ed), Neolithic Orkney and its European context, pp. 333-346.  McDonald Monographs in Archaeology, Cambridge.

Milisauskas, S. 1986. Early Neolithic settlement and society at Olszanica. University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor.

 Ryder, M. J. 1984. Livestock products: Skins and fleeces. In: Mercer R. (ed), Farming practice in British prehistory. Edinburgh University Press, Edinburgh, pp. 182-209. 

Thomas, J. S. 1996. Time, culture and identity. Routledge, London and New York.

Thomas, J. S. 1999. An economy of substances in earlier Neolithic Britain. In: Robb, J. (ed), Material Symbols: Culture and Economy in Prehistory. Southern Illinois University Press, Carbondale.

Figures:

Fig. 1. Miechowice, site 7. Cattle - body part representation.

Fig. 2. Bożejewice, site 22. Sheep/goat – body part representation.

Fig. 3. Siniarzewo, site 1, feature 30. Cattle – body part representation.

Fig. 4. Siniarzewo, site 1. Pig – body part representation.

This article was presented at the 18th International Congress of Zoology, held in Athens in August 2000. It was published in 2003 in the conference proceedings in A. Legakis, S. Sfenthourakis, R. Polymeni and M. Thessalou-Legaki (eds.), The New Panorama of Animal Evolution. Proceedings of 18th International Congress of Zoology, Athens, 309-317. Pensoft Publishers: Sofia-Moscow.