Happy to stand ammended by Haskel. I suppose that my point is that modification
by pigs is not as clear, diagnostic or common as that of the ever-popular
canids. It is only a relative thing though. Remains scavenged by pigs seem more
likely to either be entirely deleted or be unmodified (or appear to be at
least), than is the case with more specialised osteophages like dogs. For
example, pigs don't hang about gnawing on epiphyses as dogs may in what Haynes
descibes as a 'kennel pattern' (Haynes, 1982); nor do they create the same sort
of diagnostic longitudinal and spiral fractures for marrow extraction. Don't get
me wrong though, observations of the propensity for pigs to chow down on putrid
carrion has lead me swear off bacon for good (and I eat roadkill...)!
See also Spenneman, 1990, although he doesn't much describe bone modification.
Haynes, G. 1982. Utilization and skeletal disturbances of North American prey
carcasses. Arctic 35:226-281.
Spenneman, D. R. 1990. "The role of pigs and dogs in the taphonomy of
archaeological assemblages from Tonga," in Problem Solving in Taphonomy:
Archaeological and palaeontological studies from Europe, Africa and Oceania.
Edited by S. Solomon, I. Davidson, and D. Watson, pp. 101-107. St Lucia, Qld:
Anthropology Museum, The University of Queensland.
Cheers,
Oliver
Quoting Haskel Greenfield <[log in to unmask]>:
> Hi. Another article on pig chewing is my 1988 article - Bone consumption
> by pigs in a contemporary Serbian village: Implications for the
> interpretation of prehistoric faunal assemblages. Journal of Field
> Archaeology 15 (3): 473 479.
>
> My analysis stands in contrast to Oliver's comments - pigs can do
> significant damage to bone remains.
> Best
> Haskel
> Haskel J. Greenfield, Full Professor
> University of Manitoba
> Department of Anthropology
> Fletcher Argue 435
> Winnipeg, MB R3T 5V5, Canada
> Home Tel.: 204-489-4962
> Office Tel.: 204-474-6332
> Office Fax: 204-474-7600
> Email: [log in to unmask]
>
> GOD PUT ME ON EARTH TO ACCOMPLISH A CERTAIN NUMBER OF THINGS. RIGHT NOW
> I'M SO FAR BEHIND I WILL NEVER DIE!
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Analysis of animal remains from archaeological sites
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Oliver Brown
> Sent: Sunday, July 10, 2005 10:17 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: [ZOOARCH] Pig tooth marks
>
> Late with it again... but in response to Ian Baxter's original suspicion
> of pig
> chewing (and Umberto's call for onlist responsses), stuff on pig tooth
> marks
> in:
>
> Berryman, H. E. 2002. "Disarticulated pattern and tooth mark artifacts
> associated with pig scavenging of human remains: A case study," in
> Advances in
> Forensic Taphonomy: Method, Theory and Archaeological Perspectives.
> Edited by
> W. Haglund and M. Sorg, pp. 487-495. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
>
> Although also another interesting short note in:
> Galdikas, B. M. F. 1978. Orangutan death and scavenging by pigs. Science
> 200:68-70.
>
> In my own experience of experiments with carcasses and scavengers
> (including
> feral pigs), pigs can be very significant as scavengers but aren't big
> bone
> chewers. I.e., they aren't big bone modifiers, despite having an
> enormous
> potential for being assemblage modifiers, if you know what I mean.
>
> Oliver Brown
>
>
----------------------------------------------------------------
This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.
|