image/svg+xml
71
VII/1/2016
INTERDISCIPLINARIA ARCHAEOLOGICA
NATURAL SCIENCES IN ARCHAEOLOGY
homepage: http://www.iansa.eu
Dog Burial and Animal Bone Remains from the Human Graves
in Prague-Zličín
Hana Nohálová
a,b*
, Jiří Vávra
a
, Milan Kuchařík
a
a
Labrys, o.p.s. Hloubětínská 16/11, Prague 9, 19800, Czech Republic
b
Department of Geological Sciences, Faculty of Science, Masaryk University, Kotlářská 2, Brno, 61137, Czech Republic
1. Introduction
The study has two main aims: frstly, to present an individual
dog burial contemporary with the Migration Period human
burials in Prague-Zličín; and secondly to discuss the origin
and possible interpretation of the assemblage of animal bones
and other remains recovered from the infll of the graves
in this cemetery. The cemetery was excavated between
2005–2008 and is dated to the Migration Period – the 2
nd
and 3
rd
thirds of the 5
th
century AD – and ascribed to the
so-called Vinařická group and represents 173 documented
inhumation graves: the largest graveyard of this epoch in
Bohemia and one of the largest in central Europe. Its dating
to the 5
th
century AD is grounded on brooches, buckles, glass
vessels, ceramics, diferent fttings and other metal objects.
A belt buckle, a brooch and some other objects indicate an
end of the burying around 500 AD. The character of the fnds
suggests a supra-regional importance for the cemetery and
cultural relationships to Gaul, the Rhineland and regions
along the Danube, as well as to the North Sea (Vávra
et al.
2009; 2012; Jiřík
et al
. 2015).
2. Material and methods
The studied and presented zooarchaeological material comes
from the infllings of 36 skeletal graves (Table 1) out of a
total of 173 identifed graves, and the separate feature of
no. 1524. The animal bones were obtained by hand-retrieval
and fotation of the grave fllings. The zooarchaeological
analysis was based on commonly-used methods and
procedures. Relevant atlases and guides were used for the
generic and anatomical determination of the osteological
material (Schmid 1972; Červený
et al.
1999; France 2009).
Taxonomically-indeterminable material was sorted into size
categories (VSS – very small size/rodents, SS – small size/
brown hare; SS-MS – small size to medium size/European
beaver, dog; MS – medium size/sheep/goat, pig; MS-LS –
medium size to large size/pig/wild boar; LS – large size/
cattle, European red deer). Age was determined by the
coalescence of epiphyseal bones (Reitz, Wing 2008) and
Volume VII ● Issue 1/2016 ● Pages 71–86
*Corresponding author. E-mail: hanka.uhl@gmail.com
ARTICLE INFO
Article history:
Received: 3
rd
Juny 2016
Accepted: 21
st
November 2016
Key words:
Prague-Zličín
dog burial
animal bones
bone tools
Migration Period
Vinařice group
ABSTRACT
We present an evaluation of research on zooarchaeological material from the skeletal burial ground
of the Vinařická group of the Late Migration Period in Prague-Zličín. Attention is drawn to feature
no. 1524, in which was found the burial of a dog whose radiocarbon date is consistent with the dating
of the burial ground. The skeleton is of an older individual, probably female, in which was found a
fracture of the right lower canine. The rest of the article considers the animal bones from the grave
infllings, the dating of which is problematic. The bones are probably a residue and intrusion, having
nothing to do with the burial rite, and it remains unclear how much they are related to zooarchaological
evaluations of the Migration Period, the Roman Period, or the Early Middle Ages. Hence these results
cannot be reliably used to reconstruct the subsistence strategies of populations in the Migration Period.
Taphonomic phenomena associated with the activity of rodents are also discussed.
image/svg+xml
IANSA 2016 ● VII/1 ● 71–86
Hana Nohálová, Jiří Vávra, Milan Kuchařík: Dog Burial and Animal Bone Remains from the Human Graves in Prague-Zličín
72
Table 1.
Distribution of bones and malacofauna in the graves (quantifcation after NISP).
Grave no
.
NumberSpeciesPart of skeletonTotal
19
2
Sus domesticus
dens2
24
6
Ruminantdens
6
41
11
Sus domesticus
mandibula
5115
Medium mammalfragment of bone
25
Sus domesticus
dens
55
11
Bos taurus
dens
55
4
Bos taurus
mandibula
3
Undetermined mammalfragment of bone
6
Large mammal
fragment of bone
20
Medium mammalfragment of bone
2
Bos taurus
humerus
1
Bos taurus
phalanx I
8
Small mammal-Medium mammalfragment of bone
56
4
Bos taurus
humerus
5310
Large mammal
costa
39
Small mammalfragment of bone
60
1
Ovis aries/Capra hircus
pelvis
1
63
1
Sus domesticus
tibia
6816
Medium mammalfragment of bone
51
Small mammal-Medium mammalfragment of bone
65
3
Rodentia
dens
17
14
Small mammalfragment of bone
95
1
Canis familiaris
metapodium
1
107
1
Malacofaunashell
34
8
Rodentia
dens
1
Rodentia
tibia
1
Rodentia
ulna
1
Rodentia
mandibula
22
Rodentia
fragment of bone
121
1
Sus domesticus
maxilla
48
1
Medium mammal
fat bone
1
Medium mammalcosta
1
Sus domesticus
dens
3
Rodentia
dens
41
Small mammal-Medium mammalfragment of bone
126
2
Very small mammal
fragment of bone
2
127
2
Rodentia
dens2
133
1
Bos taurus
mandibula
75
10
Large mammal
fragment of bone
1
Bos taurus
metacarpus
15
Large mammal
mandibula
23
Large mammalfat bone
25
Large mammal
fragment of bone
134
4
Large mammal
long bone
5
1
Bos taurus
humerus
136
1
Bos taurus
talus
146
6
Bos taurus
mandibula
9
Large mammalfat bone
2
Bos taurus
scapula
1
Large mammal
vertebra
19
Large mammal
long bone
1
Medium mammal-Large mammalfat bone
44
Large mammal
fragment of bone
image/svg+xml
IANSA 2016 ● VII/1 ● 71–86
Hana Nohálová, Jiří Vávra, Milan Kuchařík: Dog Burial and Animal Bone Remains from the Human Graves in Prague-Zličín
73
Grave no
.
NumberSpeciesPart of skeletonTotal
136
(
Continuation
)
13
Ruminantdens
146
(
Continuation
)
1
Bos taurus
os centrotarsale
1
Bos taurus
phalanx I
1
Bos taurus
patella
3
Bos taurus
mandibula
2
Large mammalpelvis
12
Large mammalfat bone
20
Medium mammal-Large mammal
fragment of bone
1
Bos taurus
femur
1
Medium mammal
pelvis
1
Sus domesticus
vertebra
7
Medium mammalfragment of bone
138
3
Undetermined mammalfragment of bone
3
142
10
Sus domesticus
dens
74
63
Medium mammal-Large mammal
fragment of bone
1
Large mammal
long bone
143
1
Medium mammalcosta
1
146
9
Bos taurus
mandibula
90
1
Bos taurus
axis
11
Large mammal
mandibula
1
Bos taurus
pelvis
1
Large mammal
long bone
6
Large mammal
fragment of bone
3
Bos taurus
femur
2
Bos taurus
atlas
4
Bos taurus
dens
33
Medium mammal-Large mammal
fragment of bone
4
Bos taurus
scapula
15
Large mammalfat bone
147
2
Rodentia
dens2
150
1
Bos taurus
humerus1
153
11
Undetermined mammalfragment of bone
12
1
Very small mammal
fragment of bone
154
1
Medium mammal-Large mammal
mandibula
39
1
Medium mammalvertebra
1
Rodentia
pelvis
19
Rodentia
fragment of bone
17
Undetermined mammalfragment of bone
155
2
Very small mammal
fragment of bone
2
156
2
Large mammal
long bone
6
3
Medium mammal-Large mammal
long bone
1
Very small mammal
fragment of bone
159
19
Medium mammallong bone
20
1
Small mammal-Medium mammal
fat bone
161
1
Medium mammallong bone
1
162
7
Rodentia
fragment of bone7
163
1
Cepaea
shell
40
2
Undetermined mammalfragment of bone
1
Lepus europaeus
dens
35
Rodentia
fragment of bone
1
Rodentia
mandibula
164
3
Rodentia
dens
72
1
Rodentia
tibia
Table 1.
Distribution of bones and malacofauna in the graves (quantifcation after NISP). (
Continuation
)
image/svg+xml
IANSA 2016 ● VII/1 ● 71–86
Hana Nohálová, Jiří Vávra, Milan Kuchařík: Dog Burial and Animal Bone Remains from the Human Graves in Prague-Zličín
74
the replacement and eruption of teeth (Červený
et al
. 1999).
The age of the dog was determined by the state of dentition
(Procházka 1994). The methodology for measurements was
taken from von den Driesch (1976). Based on the length
parameters of relevant bones, the heights at the withers were
calculated (Driesch, Boessneck 1974). The breed of dog
was determined by Wagner (1930). All measurements were
taken using a digital calliper 300 mm/0.01 mm. Measured
values are stated in millimetres (mm). Taphonomic and
anthropogenic interventions were also observed (Lyman
1994). The morphological description of the skeletal
elements is based on Najbrt (1980).
3. Results
3.1 Dog burial
Feature no. 1524 with the dog skeleton was located at the
north-eastern edge of the explored area, northeast of the
burial ground of the Migration Period (Figure 1). The distance
between the feature and the nearest grave no. 138 was 96 m.
Due to the location of the feature at the edge of an unearthed
area, we have only a partial idea about the surrounding terrain
and its situation. The building is surrounded by two rows of
stake or pillar pits, oriented approximately in a northwest-
southeast direction, and are likely to represent the foor plan
of a prehistoric above-ground structure, stratigraphically
older than feature no. 1524, which is in superposition with
one stakehole. This above-ground construction, according
to the feld conditions, had already vanished by the time of
the original making of feature no. 1524 and the burial of the
dog, and therefore it is probably unrelated to the feature. The
terrain of most of the vicinity of feature no. 1524 remains
uncovered, and therefore we have no further information
about it.
The skeleton of the dog was placed in the western part of
an approximately rectangular oblong pit, with dimensions of
2.2×1.2 m and a depth of about 0.2 m (after soil removal),
and oriented by its longer axis in an east-west direction,
just like the individual human graves (Figure 2). However,
the shape of the pit does not correspond with the shapes
of the other burial pits: frstly, it is much shallower than
the other graves, which have an average depth of 1.2 m,
and does not contain the typical peripheral ledges or steps
at the bottom. The location of the skeleton at the edge of
a relatively long pit, without any further archaeological
fndings, is a distinctive feature, which prompts the question
of whether there was anything else placed in the pit along
with the dog, and possibly leaving some archaeological
trace. There were no traces of any burial box next to the dog
skeleton. Below the skeleton, in the bottom of the feature
the rest of one posthole was found, which belongs to the
previously mentioned two rows of postholes near the feature.
The skeleton of the dog partially overlaps the posthole and
is unimpaired, so the stakehole cannot be younger than
feature no. 1524 and the burial of the dog. Next to the dog
skeleton, a fragment of the frst cervical vertebra from a cow
(
Bos taurus
) was found. Because of the absence of ceramic
material in the inflling of the feature, dating was obtained
by a
14
C-radiocarbon dating from the skeleton of the dog. For
this purpose, a right calcaneus weighing 5 g was removed.
The sample was analysed in the Radiocarbon Laboratory,
Poznan (Poz-64641), giving us the date of 1550 ± 30 BP
(Table 2). After data calibration the dating was shown to
fall into a small radiocarbon plateau, hence its dating is not
completely reliable. Due to the archaeological situation and
radicarbon dating, it can be assumed that the dog skeleton
belongs to the Migration Period.
The nearly complete skeleton of the adult dog (
Canis
familiaris
) was examined; it had been placed on its right
side, with his head to the south and feet to the east. From the
position of the skeleton, it is obvious that the animal had been
carefully laid into the feature, not thrown (Figure 3). Due
to the weather conditions, the skeletal remains were in very
Grave no
.
NumberSpeciesPart of skeletonTotal
164
(
Continuation
)
4
Undetermined mammalfragment of bone
72
(
Continuation
)
1
Ruminantdens
46
Rodentia
fragment of bone
5
Small mammal-Medium mammalfragment of bone
1
Rodentia
pelvis
11
Rodentia
long bone
165
1
Rodentia
dens
41
Rodentia
mandibula
2
Rodentia
long bone
166
1
Small mammalfragment of bone
1
167
1
Very small mammal
fragment of bone
1
174
2
Very small mammal
fragment of bone
3
1
Very small mammal
long bone
175
1
Very small mammal
fragment of bone
1
Table 1.
Distribution of bones and malacofauna in the graves (quantifcation after NISP). (
Continuation
)
image/svg+xml
IANSA 2016 ● VII/1 ● 71–86
Hana Nohálová, Jiří Vávra, Milan Kuchařík: Dog Burial and Animal Bone Remains from the Human Graves in Prague-Zličín
75
Figure 1.
The overall research plan and the relationship of feature no. 1524 to the burial ground.
0 100 m
0 5 m
image/svg+xml
IANSA 2016 ● VII/1 ● 71–86
Hana Nohálová, Jiří Vávra, Milan Kuchařík: Dog Burial and Animal Bone Remains from the Human Graves in Prague-Zličín
76
Figure 2.
Feature no. 1524 with the dog
burial.
Figure 3.
Position of the dog skeleton in feature no. 1524 (a) and the pillar pit at the bottom of the feature (b).
0 1 m
image/svg+xml
IANSA 2016 ● VII/1 ● 71–86
Hana Nohálová, Jiří Vávra, Milan Kuchařík: Dog Burial and Animal Bone Remains from the Human Graves in Prague-Zličín
77
poor state of preservation (Figure 4). However, if the state of
preservation allowed, they were subjected to morphometric
analysis (Table 3). There were 508 fragments obtained in
varying stages of conservation, with the predominance of
bones being of the skull and jaws, limbs and vertebrae.
A dog’s age can be determined fairly accurately during its
puppy years on the basis of the exchange of milk teeth for
permanent teeth. In the case of the Zličín fnding, it is a dog
with complete permanent teeth, in which case it is possible
to determine its age according to the stage of wear of the
Table 2.
Radiocarbon dating of the calcaneus of dog.
OxCal v4.2.3 Bronk Ramsey (2013); r:5; IntCal13 atmospheric curve (Reimer
et al.
2013)
I.D.Sample14C age1 sigma2 sigma
Poz-64641
Dog-calcaneus
1550±30BP
430AD to 550AD 423AD to 574AD
Table 3.
Biometry of bones (in mm). * Indicative measure (damaged bone).
Part of skeletonBiometry (in mm)
Right mandibula (c, p1 – m3)
m1
:
L
– 23.05,
B
– 10.17;
m2
:
L
– 9.26,
B
– 7.67;
m3
:
L
– 5.49,
B
– 4.87;
7
– 87.4;
8
– 81.06;
9
– 74.43;
10
– 38.47;
11
– 44.08;
12
– 36.48;
13
– 22.96;
19
– 28.45;
20
– 22.07
Left mandibula (c, p1 – m3)
m1
:
L
– 22.33,
B
– 9.5;
m2
:
L
– 9.34,
B
– 7.67;
m3
:
L
– 5.72,
B
– 4.89;
8
– 81.22;
9
– 74.33;
10
– 38.19;
11
– 44.48;
12
– 36.24;
13
– 23.01;
19
– 28.99;
20
– 22.44
Right maxilla (P2 – M2)
P4
:
L
– 18.36,
GB
– 11.39,
B
– 8.48;
M1
:
L
– 14.14,
B
– 15.43;
M2
:
L
– 7.41,
B
– 10.13;
16
– 21.24
Figure 4.
The better preserved skeletal fragments of the dog skeleton. a – atlas, b – femur, c – radius, d – talus, e – ulna, f – calcaneus, g, h – tibia.
image/svg+xml
IANSA 2016 ● VII/1 ● 71–86
Hana Nohálová, Jiří Vávra, Milan Kuchařík: Dog Burial and Animal Bone Remains from the Human Graves in Prague-Zličín
78
teeth, particularly the incisors and canines (Figure 5). On its
incisors it is possible to see elimination of the dental crown
cusps, which continues in the abrasion of the incisor bodies
and their contraction. This occurs roughly at the age of six
years in an individual. The canines are also abraded, which
generally happens from the age of fve years. By comparing
the teeth of the Zličín dog with the teeth of present-day
dogs, we can say that it was a dog older than six years, and,
according to the stage of abrasion, probably even older than
ten years. However, it is also necessary to consider the dog’s
Figure 5.
Teeth of the dog. a – incisors and canines, b – maxilla with P2-M2, c – detail of M1-M2, d – detail of m1.