 |
The
representations of prehistoric dogs are very rare.
In this example from the
Neolithic site of Catal Hüyük
in the Near Orient (7000 BC), a dog seems to be
assisting the hunt (from Benecke N. 1994, Der Mensch
und seine Haustiere. Die
Geschichte einer
jahrtausendalten Beziehung. Thesis).
|
In a new paper, Horard-Herbin,
Tresset, and Vigne examine the history of the dog in Western Europe through
archaeozoology evidence, and make inferences about the relationships between humans
and dogs through prehistory. The dog was domesticated by Upper Paleolithic hunter-gatherers,
but the domestication process remains unclear, in terms of chronology,
geographic origin, and recurrence of the phenomenon. What follows is my summary
of the paper, representing the author’s view on the history of dogs in Europe.
The entire paper is available on-line.
The first dogs
appeared in the Late Glacial between 18,000 and 10,000 BC, from the Magdalenian
period to the end of the Epipalaeolithic. Evidence for morphologically
transformed animals come from the Iberian Peninsula, Siberia, Aquitaine in
France, the French Alps, central and northern Europe, and the Near East. In the
authors’ view multiple independent domestication events took place across much
of the Old World. Recent morphometric analyses of dogs from the southeast and
north of France have revealed marked morphological differences between a group
of small-sized dogs originating in the West and other much larger dogs with a
different physical structure from northeast Europe in the same period; indeed,
some of these “larger dogs” were probably wolves. This study led to formally
identifying two very distinct populations of dogs during the Upper Paleolithic,
which potentially reflect distinct centers of domestication. These findings
support the fragmentation in the landscape in the Late Glacial of Eurasia due
to the polar and orogenic ice caps, and also the diversity and relative
isolation of hunter-gather cultures from the same period. This is also in line
with the common practice in hunter-gatherer societies of pet keeping, where
young animals were integrated in the family group and breast fed with the
children to compensate for the animals taken from nature through hunting. This
practice, demonstrating that hunter-gatherers were as capable of raising
animals as the Neolithic age people, could have played an important role in the
domestication of dogs in different places.
Late Glacial dogs displayed a wide variety of
statures, from medium-sized Natoufian dogs in the Near East and their Northern
Zagos contemporaries (height: 45 to 60 cm), to medium or large sizes (height
> 60 cm) for dogs in eastern Europe, to very small dogs (height 30 to 45 cm
or < 30 cm) in Germany, Switzerland, the east of France, and the southwest
and north of Spain. Other large canid fossils dated about 30,000 BC found in Belgium,
Siberia (27,000 BC), and the Czech Republic (24,000 BC) have been interpreted
as domestic dogs 15,000 years before the others. However, analyses suggest that
the morphological character considered by the authors of these discoveries as
identifying domestication are instead morphological variations of the Upper
Paleolithic wolves, whose morphological variability remains poorly known.
Dogs were scarce
in the early Neolithic of Europe, with the notable exception of the Herxheim
pit enclosure (western Germany, Linearbandkeramik culture, end of the sixth
millennium cal. BP), where dogs were found in partial association with human
remains. The few data collected for this period suggest the animals remained
relatively large, though significantly smaller than the wolf. Modifications
such as shortening of the face and dental crowding were also already obvious in
animals of this period. Tooth anomalies (essentially missing teeth) were
frequent. The decrease in size was accentuated until the fourth millennium cal.
BP and culminated in the Neolithic/Chalcolithic period with the occurrence of
small and very small dogs in southeastern Europe but also in western Europe (at
Bercy and many other sites of the Chasséen complex and related cultures). These
small dogs are rarely found complete and are often retrieved from rubbish pits
and dumping areas, which strongly suggests that they were commonly consumed,
even when cut or burn marks are absent. Estimation of age based on tooth
eruption and tooth wear shows that young and subadult animals were the most
abundant, strengthening the hypothesis that dogs were consumed in this period.
Few dogs found at
the end of the Neolithic in Western Europe were larger than those evidenced for
the fourth millennium. The incomplete dogs found in a mass grave at Bury in
northern France were large individuals with slightly shortened faces. Analyses
of their DNA showed that one of them at least was black, whereas another still
retained the wild coat color. Overall, data from the Mesolithic and Neolithic
periods in Europe provide evidence about the evolution of dog phenotypes and the
status of dogs.
Bronze Age dogs are
rare, but those studied from central and Eastern Europe, the British Isles, and
the Italian and Iberian peninsulas are generally of a homogeneous size. 40 to
50 cm with occasionally a few larger individuals, but never smaller specimens.
The only region for which this is not true is Switzerland where the size of
dogs also increased significantly from the late Neolithic, but where in the
late Bronze Age, a population of larger, sturdier dogs remained (50 to 60 cm).
During the Iron
Age, the majority of the canine population remained morphologically
homogeneous, with dogs averaging 40 to 55 cm in the British Isles, Gaul,
central Europe, and Italy. They were slender animals whose leg bones presented
no particular modifications, such as twisting or marked sturdiness, which
characterized certain morphotypes from the Roman period. Nevertheless, at the
end of the Gallic period, an increase in size at the withers could be observed
with the appearance of small and large dogs. Taking the example of Gaul, the
first phenomenon during the second century BP was the appearance of small dogs
in certain habitats only, namely those of aristocrats, and in certain
sanctuaries. These small individuals were isolated and always associated with a
medium-sized population from which they seemed not to have originated.
According to the current state of knowledge, only three sites of Celtic Europe
show a bipartite distribution of wither heights, a large number of individuals,
and all the intermediate sizes: Levroux (Indre, France) and Manching and
Berching-Pollanten, both in the same region of Bavaria. On the site of Levroux,
some skulls show a marked shortening of the face associated with dental
pathologies. Indeed, some teeth are missing or overlapping, which is firm
evidence of face shortening, but there is no sign of limb bone modification.
The highlighting of these specific breeding places is an interesting
observation in regards to the ancient authors who indicated that specialized
dog breeding existed in Gaul and Great Britain, mainly for hunting or war dogs.
At the end of La
Tène period on a few European Celtic sites, very small dogs appeared that qualify
as dwarfs. They were extremely rare, isolated among populations from which they
could not have stemmed, and their sizes being outside all the size ranges known
in the Iron Age. This is the case for the only complete skeleton of a dog
measuring 27 cm at the withers from the Oppidum of Rheinau, Switzerland, and
whose presence has been interpreted as an import of a pet from the
Mediterranean region. This hypothesis is in line with those developed by
several authors suggesting that these dwarf lapdogs, much appreciated by Roman
ladies, originated in the Roman Empire. They would have been offered to the
upper classes of the Celtic society by the Romans, in the same way as observed
for horses, and attested to by certain ancient authors. Included with luxurious
gifts, they would have had an exceptional value and status.
The limitation
of this import hypothesis is that on examining the range of wither heights of
dogs in Italy from the Neolithic to the end of the Roman period or dogs from Pompeii,
no dwarf dogs less than 29 cm can be observed during what is known as the Early
Roman period (third century BC to second AD corresponding to our chronology of
the Iron Age and the Early Roman period), and those smaller than 25 cm only
appeared at the end of the Roman Empire (third to sixth century AD;). On the
other hand, dwarf dogs (20, 22, and 23 cm) have been found in Germany, Hungary,
France, and Great Britain from early Roman times. For the latter, observed
that these dogs were smaller than their contemporaries in Italy. This is clear
evidence that the hypothesis of dwarf Roman dogs being imported is not
pertinent for the Iron Age, and the function, origin, and means of circulation
of dwarf dogs at the Celtic European scale remain unknown.
During the
second Iron Age, large dogs reaching a maximum wither height of 65 cm were
found in Europe, corresponding approximately to the size of a Gordon Setter,
but which had still not reached the 75 cm height of a very large dog (taller
than a wolf), which did not appear until the Roman period. These large dogs
were found in Belgium and Germany and very rarely in Gallic settlements with
less than 10 individuals measuring more than 60 cm. It is difficult to
determine whether these dogs represent the upper limit of the size range of
middle-sized populations, stemmed from slightly larger populations persisting
in certain regions (in Austria, on the Durezza cave site, the size range of
dogs from the first Iron Age was from 49 to 64 cm; n = 126), or were
the result of specific breeding that has not been identified through
archaeology yet, such as war dogs mentioned by ancient authors. In general,
studies investigate samples that are too small to enable definition of a population,
and only with the development of genetic studies will light be shed on this
question.
In any case, the
very small and very large individuals are extremely rare, and it is complex to
determine whether their morphotypes, identified as specific through our
archeozoological analyses, are in fact linked to a specific status. It has been
established that some individuals were incinerated with their “master” in a
funeral context, while others were simply eaten, and the fate of some of them
did not differ fundamentally from that of medium-sized dogs, as explained
below.
The Celts lived
with a pack of dogs of similar morphology. However, from the skeletal evidence
available, it is clear this was the beginning of selection of certain
morphotypes, as illustrated by the shortening of the face of certain skulls and
the associated pathologies, and the diversification of wither height. This is
reflected in the 30 or so “races” of dogs cited by ancient authors and for
which iconographic representations have remained. In the texts, they are
characterized by their geographic origins and by the services they provided:
pet, hunting dog, war or guard dog, some coming from Gaul such as the Vertagus or
the Ségusien hound.
The authors
conclude that a general and partial approach to the evolution of dogs in Europe
from the Paleolithic to the Iron Age shows to what extent certain questions
regarding this species reoccur across time. In particular, at the beginning of
the Neolithic and at the end of the Iron Age, indigenous lines and exogenous
inputs can be observed. It would be interesting to characterize these new dogs
from the point of view of their bone morphology (e.g., size, robustness, and
proportions) and their genetic characteristics (e.g., origins and coat color)
to measure their impact on the population in place over the long term (e.g.,
cohabitation, replacement). These elements are also necessary to draw a link between
specific morphotypes and functions as certain modern-day societies (e.g., South
Korea) have races of dogs for meat production, even though the term race is
completely inappropriate for the periods of interest. (The term race refers to
a population of the same species having distinct hereditary, morphological, and
physiological characteristics according to the standards defined in the herd
and flock books drawn up since the 19th century. For all earlier periods, the
more appropriate term morphotype should be used.)
Citation
Horard-Herbin M-P. Tresset A, Vigne
D-D. 2014. Domestication and uses of the dog in western Europe from the
Paleolithic to the Iron Age. Animal Frontiers 4 (3): 23-31.
No comments:
Post a Comment