Due to the differences in their digestive systems, horses tend to have
larger pieces of plant material in their dung, as opposed to cattle, a fact
Anderson, S. and Ertug-Yaras, F. 1998 'Fuel, Fodder and Faeces: An
ethnographic and Botanical study of dung fuel use in Central Anatolia',
Environmental Archaeology 1, 99-109
Gaimster, D.R.M. 1986 'Dung Tempering? A Late Norse Case Study from
Caithness', Medieval Ceramics 10, 43-7.
(The larger pieces make dung a smoky fuel, but a good ceramic temper).
I also have a reference to equid parasite eggs from:
Nansen, P. 1991 'Finds of Parasite Eggs in Manure Layers' in Bencard, M.,
Jorgenson, L. and Madsen, H.B. Ribe Excavations 1970-76:3 Sydjysk
Universitetsforlag, Esbjerg 37-41.
I knew that undergrad dissertation on dung would be useful one day!
Dept of Archaeology
University of York
On Nov 17 2005, Christian Küchelmann wrote:
> Hi all,
> I would like to forward a request of my colleague Roman Hovsepyan,
> archaeobotanist at the Institute of Botany in Yerevan, Armenia.
> Does anyone know data or publications containing information about
> distinguishing criteria for horse versus cattle faeces from
> archaeological deposits? I assume they are easy to discriminate when
> they have their original shape, but is there a possibility to identify
> the origin in shapeless faeces too, e. g. by the content or condition of
> plant fibres.