An interesting question....known food birds not corresponding with
actual birds found at archaeological sites.
Does this discrepancy reflect that archaeological bird assemblages
are mostly natural accumulations, including prey of
raptors/predators, rather than human food waste? Perhaps the
large food birds listed were hunted far and wide in the surrounding
countryside, but species found at settlement sites were species
living locally?
Of course, even in Medieval times, some bird distributions must
have been geographically restricted. Even if spoonbills were eaten
in E. Anglia, we wouldn't necessarily expect to find their bones in a
Yorkshire site.
Chris Gleed-Owen
This E-mail and any files transmitted with it are private and intended
solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed.
If you are not the intended recipient, the E-mail and any files have been
transmitted to you in error and any copying, distribution or other use of
the information contained in them is strictly prohibited.
Nothing in this E-mail message amounts to a contractual or other legal
commitment on the part of English Nature unless confirmed by a signed
communication.
English Nature will make every effort to keep its network free of viruses.
However, the recipient of this message will need to check this message, and
any attachments, for viruses, as English Nature can take no responsibility
for any computer virus that might be transferred by this e-mail.
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|