Dear Jillian and Pam,

I'm interested in this deposit. I like Pam's idea of a hoard of  
"precious objects". How many of us zooarchs collected animal bones as  
children? A mouse skeleton would be an appealing thing to own, and the  
sort of thing you'd want to keep hidden from  
adults/superiors/bullies/asylum staff, who would perhaps be inclined  
to throw it away or destroy it.
I've come across complete small-furry skeletons in forgotten traps  
before. Also, is it possible that the bones came from an owl pellet,  
or are they too ordered for that?

Rachel

Quoting Pam Cross <[log in to unmask]>:

>
> Dear Jillian
> In view of the further info on the mice deposition, eg on a 2nd floor, I'd
> be inclined to agree it's more likely a personal ritual rather than a charm
>  deposition. Ritual behaviour is part of standard human behaviour, so
> common in  all periods in both individual and broader cultural  
> expressions. It's
> rather  unfortunate that 'ritual' behaviour attributes are now seen as
> 'don't know what  else' or as superstition or religious by many. It  
> may have been
> someone's hoard  of important objects, either child or adult. Whether it
> was a burial is more  intriquing.
>
> In terms of your deposit, what exactly makes you think the mice were
> deposited as skeletons? Are/were the bones articulated? If so, that  
> implies the
> presence of soft tissue. It would be extremely hard work to deflesh mice and
>  maintain articulation -- it would certainly require much consideration and
>  intent. Is it possible people there had access to biology lab specimens?
> If the  site is dry and well-ventilated I would expect more a mummification
> process of  fleshed animals. What other types of materials were found?
>
> Pam Cross
>
> In a message dated 07/05/2010 08:11:37 GMT Daylight Time,
> [log in to unmask] writes:
>
> Hi  Rich,
>
> The matchbox was part of a large collection of material (some  deliberately
> and some accidentally placed) that was located directly under the  floor
> boards on floor 2 of the asylum. I guess what is most intriguing is that  it
> appears that it was the skeletons, not the fleshed mice that were placed in
> the box as there is other organic material such as paper associated with
> them.
>
> Cheers,
> Jillian
>
>
> -----Original  Message-----
> From: [log in to unmask] [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent:  Friday, 7 May 2010 1:48 PM
> To: Jillian Garvey
> Subject: Re: [ZOOARCH]  Mice skeletons in a matchbox
>
> Jillian, was the matchbox just in the  subflor space, or was it actually
> buried in the dirt under the floor?  If  it was the later, I'd guess you are
> looking at a couple of mice kept as "pets"  by children in the asylum, and
> "buried" when they died.
>
> I'd be very  hesitant to suggest the "symbolic/religious" exdplanation -
> that just harks  back to a time in archaeology when anything we didn't
> undersand was attributed  to relgion.
>
>
>
> Rich
>
> In a message dated 5/6/2010 8:30:04  P.M. US Mountain Standard Time,
> [log in to unmask] writes:
>
> Hello list,
>
> I have a query from a  colleague who has found two complete mice skeletons
> in a matchbox under the  floor from the Hyde Park Barracks Destitute Asylum
> in Sydney, dated between  1860s-1880s. The matchbox was found directly under
> the entrance door. He is  not sure if there may have been placed there by
> children (perhaps they were  once pets) or by an adult perhaps as a
> symbolic/religious gesture. I guess  what is interesting is that the  
> skeletons are in
> excellent condition so it's  assumed that they weren't found accidently and
> then placed in the matchbox. If  anyone has come across this sort of thing
> before and/or and has any advice, it  would be greatly appreciated.
>
> Best  Wishes,
> Jillian
>
> --------------------------------------------
> Dr Jillian  Garvey
> Research Associate
> Archaeology  Program
> La Trobe University
> Victoria,  Australia, 3086
> Tel. +61 3 9479 1031
> Fax.  +61 3 9479 1881
> Mob. 0438 009 661
> [log in to unmask]
>
>
>
>