Waste management at early medieval rural sites in northern Spain ...

7 downloads 0 Views 2MB Size Report
The aim of this paper is to explore the taphonomic aspects of faunal remains recovered in early medieval rural sites in central and northern Iberian Peninsula, ...
Quaternary International xxx (2013) 1e12

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Quaternary International journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/quaint

Waste management at early medieval rural sites in northern Spain: Taphonomic issues for interpreting faunal remains Idoia Grau Sologestoa Department of Geography, Prehistory and Archaeology, University of the Basque Country, C/Tomás y Valiente, s/n, 01006 Vitoria-Gasteiz, Álava, Spain

a r t i c l e i n f o

a b s t r a c t

Article history: Available online xxx

The aim of this paper is to explore the taphonomic aspects of faunal remains recovered in early medieval rural sites in central and northern Iberian Peninsula, in order to understand site formation processes and the ways of refuse management and disposal, key aspects for archaeological interpretation. To do so, a methodology that allows intra-site and inter-site comparison of recovery bias and fragmentation has been designed and applied to five rural settlements dated between the 6th and the 10th centuries AD. Discussion of the primary and non-primary deposits at these sites is presented. Ó 2013 Elsevier Ltd and INQUA. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction

these settlements, which has important implications for the general interpretation of the sites. It is our intention to approach this analysis from the point of view of a ‘multivariate taphonomy’ (BarOz and Munro, 2004) applied to social zooarchaeology (Orton, 2010), therefore avoiding the usual experimental approach of taphonomic studies. In this work we will consider, as major taphonomic factors, preburial processes (butchery, disposal strategies, scavengers, weathering), post-burial processes (nature of burial environment, reworking of deposits) and excavation strategies (selective excavation, hand/machine recovery, sampling). Some of the main aims of studying the preservation, fragmentation and taphonomic processes are determining to what extent the burial conditions have adversely affected the faunal assemblage; determining the genesis of individual deposits; and determining if pre-depositional factors and excavation techniques have played a part in the current composition and appearance of the assemblage. In order to carry out this taphonomic analysis, faunal remains from five early medieval rural sites from the northern and central Iberian Peninsula will be considered. All faunal assemblages were analysed using similar methods by the same zooarchaeologist. This fact, together with the standardisation of the taphonomic indicators that will be taken into account, has led to the design of a methodology suitable to do a basic taphonomic analysis for assessing possible biases and understanding site formation processes, as well as facilitating intra-site and inter-site comparisons.

Medieval archaeology in Spain has undergone a remarkable development in the last decades, thanks to the consolidation of new research groups and to the past years of economic prosperity, which facilitated the development of commercial archaeology and the policies of heritage management. Some of the ‘revolutionary’ aspects of this development are the incorporation of landscape features, such as fields and agricultural terraces, to the concept of ‘archaeological site’ (Quirós, 2009a), and the integration of archaeological disciplines that were previously not often utilized in historical sites in Spain, such as environmental sciences and biomolecular archaeology, in the common archaeological practice. In this sense, bioarchaeological disciplines are now almost completely integrated in most archaeological interventions that are carried out in northern Spain. Moreover, in the last few years, the number of zooarchaeological site reports of medieval sites that have been published has increased considerably. However, little attention has been paid to taphonomic analysis of the faunal remains recovered in medieval settlements. Being part of the archaeological deposits, faunal remains are subjected to biostratinomic and diagenetic processes that left traces on them, providing an excellent opportunity to analyse in which ways archaeological contexts were formed. This paper constitutes the first reflection about various taphonomic issues that have not only biased the faunal assemblages recovered in early medieval rural sites, but that also provide the opportunity to understand how waste and refuse were managed in

E-mail address: [email protected].

2. The sites In this section, basic information about the sites that will be considered here is given, including their location and when were

1040-6182/$ e see front matter Ó 2013 Elsevier Ltd and INQUA. All rights reserved. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2013.12.016

Please cite this article in press as: Grau Sologestoa, I., Waste management at early medieval rural sites in northern Spain: Taphonomic issues for interpreting faunal remains, Quaternary International (2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2013.12.016

2

I. Grau Sologestoa / Quaternary International xxx (2013) 1e12

they excavated. Also, a brief description of the site is provided, in order to contextualize the taphonomic analysis. Four sites are located in the southern part of the Basque Country (Zornoztegi, Zaballa, Aistra and San Martín), and one is located in Madrid (El Pelícano). In central and northern Iberian Peninsula, early medieval rural sites are characterised (Quirós, 2009b) by the scarcity of monumental elements and the predominance of negative structures (also called sunken featured structures or cut features) occupying large extensions. Most of these sites were also greatly damaged by either modern agricultural work or post-medieval urban occupations. In many cases, vertical stratigraphy is lacking due to the destruction of upper levels by ploughing (as in Zaballa -Quirós, 2012). Most early medieval villages were comprised of a small number of farmsteads or households. Only in a few sites has it been possible to determine the existence of areas specifically used for artisanal activities, such as the production of ceramics (Mata del Palomar in Segovia), metallurgy (La Legoriza in Salamanca and Bagoeta in Álava), or pressing for producing wine and oil (Gózquez in Madrid). First interventions in rural settlements in the Iberian Peninsula involved the excavation of small areas, where only a few structures could be identified, and where the nature of the occupation was barely comprehensible. As this strategy proved not to be very useful, excavation in open areas has become a common practice. This is the case of the five sites considered here, with San Martín having a smaller excavated area (approx. 800 m2). The utilization of heavy excavation machinery has made possible to excavate these large extents, but the recovery of faunal remains has been far from ideal. 2.1. Zornoztegi The deserted village of Zornoztegi is located on the top of a hill south of Luzuriaga (Salvatierra-Agurain), in the province of Álava, Basque Country. The excavation was directed by J.A. Quirós Castillo (University of the Basque Country) and was carried out during five consecutive campaigns between 2005 and 2009. Around one hectare was excavated in an open area. The oldest evidence in Zornoztegi is two sunken structures dated to ca. 2500 BC. The site was later occupied with a small farmstead in Late Roman times (4the5th C. AD.), and from the 6th C., a peasant village was established here. The appearance of Zornoztegi changed during the 12th C., when a church was built and the settlement was reorganized surrounding it. After the foundation of Salvatierra, in 1256, Zornoztegi was gradually abandoned; its inhabitants were attracted by new opportunities in the town. The faunal assemblage recovered in Zornoztegi is composed of 8858 total number of fragments.

2.3. Aistra Aistra is a deserted village located northwest of Zalduondo, in the province of Álava, in the Basque Country. The excavation took place during four campaigns between 2006 and 2009, and was directed by J.A. Quirós Castillo (University of the Basque Country) and A. Reynolds (University College London). Aistra was long occupied, from Roman times (2nde3rd C.) until the end of the 13th C. The church of the village, built in the 10th C., is still used as a shrine. Throughout the early medieval period, Aistra was a peasant village, although the presence of elites was identified with the construction of a long house in the 8th C. and the re-organization of the settlement. The total number of fragments of faunal remains were recovered in Aistra was 6924. 2.4. San Martín Between November 2009 and May 2010, Iterbide S.C. carried out an archaeological excavation, directed by J. Niso Lorenzo and M. Loza Uriarte, in the streets of Nuestra Señora de Ayala and San Martín, in the town of Alegría-Dulantzi, in the province of Álava, in the Basque Country. Approximately 800 m2 were excavated in an open area. The site was first occupied in the 2nd millennium BC, but it has been continuously occupied from Roman times (1ste3rd C. AD) until today. The Roman urbanised scheme was substituted by a peasant village in the 6the7th C, in which a large building was constructed, with a possible religious function. During the 8the 10th C., this building was used for storing crops. In later periods, the only structures that have been identified are related to the use of this space as a necropolis. The faunal assemblage from San Martín is the smallest considered here, with only 1268 fragments. 2.5. El Pelícano The site of El Pelícano is located in Arroyomolinos, 27 km southwest of Madrid. It was excavated in different campaigns, but we will be referring here only to the faunal assemblage recovered in 2003 and 2004 at sector number 9 of the site. The excavation was directed by L. Virseda Sanz and A. Vigil-Escalera Guirado, from AREA S.C. Late Bronze Age or early Iron Age contexts were found, but the settlement was occupied afterwards, in the second half of the 5th century AD, with a peasant rural settlement that suffered small changes along time, until the area lost its residential function and was substituted by a Christian necropolis. The faunal assemblage recovered at El Pelícano (sector 9) is the largest of the ones considered here, with 10403 fragments.

2.2. Zaballa

3. Methodology

The deserted site of Zaballa was excavated between February 2007 and November 2008. The excavation was directed by J.A. Quirós Castillo. More than three hectares were excavated in an open area. The site is located on the northern slope of the Mountains of Vitoria, inside the municipality of Iruña de Oca, in the province of Álava. The results of the intervention were published in a monograph (Quirós, 2012). The site was first occupied with a small rural settlement in the 6th C. AD. During the 8th C., Zaballa was established as a peasant village, with no major changes until the 10th C. Between the 11th and the 13th C., the presence of local or supra-local powers is visible with the construction of a private church that eventually became a parish, with an associated cemetery. During the Late Middle Ages, the site was gradually abandoned. The total number of fragments that are included in the faunal assemblage is 9864.

3.1. Recovery The excavation of the faunal remains was carried out by different groups of archaeologists and, therefore, some differences in the methods applied are expected. In all cases, however, consultation about the strategies for recovering, sampling and storing animal remains occurred, and the recommendations were given by the same zooarchaeologist. Both commercial companies and research groups based at universities were asked to recover all animal remains from the excavated areas and, if possible, to collect samples of soil from all the contexts, in order to process them through flotation and fine sieving. The soil samples from all the sites were floated, but during the campaign of 2006 at Zornoztegi, the 20% of the excavated soil was also dry sieved on site with a mesh of 1 cm.

Please cite this article in press as: Grau Sologestoa, I., Waste management at early medieval rural sites in northern Spain: Taphonomic issues for interpreting faunal remains, Quaternary International (2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2013.12.016

I. Grau Sologestoa / Quaternary International xxx (2013) 1e12

Flotation took place at the laboratories of the University of the Basque Country (under the supervision of I. Sopelana), using a machine with a constant water flow from the lower part. Two meshes were used, one inside the water (aperture of 0.5 mm) and another one outside (aperture of 0.25 mm), where the water overflowed. The residues were afterwards dry sieved using a ‘tower’ of meshes of different sizes, from 2 mm to 0.25 mm. These sites were excavated using heavy tools such as picks and shovels which, in many cases, either broke the faunal materials or left traces on them. To a large extent, freshly broken bones were reassembled. Articulated skeletons or anatomical elements were bagged separately. 3.2. Recording The animal remains were analysed following a methodology that has been explained elsewhere (Grau, 2009), and therefore will not be repeated here in detail; instead, only those aspects related to the taphonomic analysis will be discussed. These faunal assemblages were recorded using the system of ‘diagnostic zones’ (Davis, 1992; Albarella and Davis, 1994), a system that, among other advantages, saves time and effort, but it has proven to be a useful method applicable to all kinds of faunal assemblages, for a certain level of taphonomic analysis. The Number of Identified Specimens (NISP) provided here is a corrected NISP that takes into account anatomical elements of uncertain identification (see Grau (2009) for more clarification). There is not a standardised way of recording and assessing fragmentation and preservation of faunal remains, and to some extent, they are all based on subjective criteria. However, in all these five sites that have been studied, burning marks, cut marks, gnawing marks and other traces left on the bone surface were recorded, using the same methods, therefore enhancing comparability. In order to make comparisons possible, the categories were simplified to the following: burning marks (singed, burnt, calcined), cut marks (cut, chop, saw), gnawing marks (carnivores, rodents), and combinations of these marks. General stage of preservation was also recorded, using a simple classification of awful, bad, medium, good or excellent preservation of the bones, adding, if necessary, some comments about the cause of the poor preservation, such as weathering marks, corrosion, erosion, root marks and metallic concretions. All these observations were made macroscopically. For example, the classification of burning marks was based on the colour of the bone and the surface appearance, although there is a great variation on this (Shipman et al., 1984; Nicholson, 1993; Stiner et al., 1995; Bennett, 1999). In some cases, it was not possible to determine the taphonomic process related to the stage of preservation of the cortical bone but it was recorded anyway, because the poor preservation may affect the observation of other marks in the bone, such as cut marks. 3.3. Taphonomic indicators For estimating the fragmentation, preservation and recovery bias in the faunal assemblages at these five sites, four indicators were chosen. These indicators can be easily calculated from the data recorded following a diagnostic zone method in which not all the fragments are recorded. Also, by standardising the ways to measure the bias introduced by taphonomic processes, intra-site (i.e. between phases or areas) and inter-site comparisons are possible. These four indicators are intended to estimate the biasing effects of two main taphonomic aspects: the incidence of scavengers and fragmentation, which can be caused by natural factors, produced by humans or originated by excavation and recovery methods. Numbers 1, 2 and 3 were used as indicators of fragmentation and

3

preservation bias, while number 4 was considered as an indicator of recovery bias. These indicators were the following: - Indicator 1: the proportion of isolated first and second molars (upper and lower) compared to the total number of first and second molars (upper and lower); - Indicator 2: the proportion of teeth compared to the total NISP; - Indicator 3: the proportion of gnawed postcranial bones; - Indicator 4: the proportion of isolated incisors compared to the total number of isolated teeth. A high proportion of isolated dental elements (indicator 1) may reflect a high fragmentation of the faunal assemblage. Teeth are less affected by physical agents of destruction, so a high proportion of them (indicator 2) may be related to an important incidence of such agents on the faunal remains. Scavengers are an important factor related to poor preservation and high fragmentation; a high proportion of gnawed bones (indicator 3) may suggest the loss of smaller and more fragile faunal remains. Incisors are the smallest dental element, so a high frequency of them when isolated (indicator 4) reflects a good recovery of animal remains. The results of the application of these indicators for the taphonomic analysis of the five faunal assemblages are shown in Section 4.3. but, before moving to that, we would like to dedicate some attention to the type of archaeological contexts (from a taphonomic perspective) that are found in early medieval rural sites, with a special attention on the implications for the socioeconomic interpretation of these settlements. 4. Taphonomic analysis The recognition of the formation processes of the archaeological contexts (Schiffer, 1987) is extremely important, as they condition (i) how the stratigraphic sequence is constructed and interpreted; (ii) the understanding of how archaeological structures and deposits were used and abandoned, and (iii) the strategies for making the radiocarbon dating of the archaeological deposits (Quirós, 2012: 64). Sunken featured structures are a characteristic of rural sites, and indeed, in many cases, storage pits for grain (or silos) (i.e. Sigaut, 1978; Vigil-Escalera et al., 2013), post holes, ditches and pits of unknown function are the only structures that are found. Vertical stratigraphy is rare, as these structures were usually infilled in a single event using material brought from elsewhere and, hence, redeposited. This re-deposition might have occurred more than once and, therefore, we name this type of context ‘non-primary’ deposits instead of ‘secondary’ deposits, which is the term normally used. 4.1. Primary deposits Primary deposits are archaeological contexts that are found in their original location, regardless if diagenetic processes have affected them. In early medieval rural sites, primary deposits are floors, deposits related to the abandonment or collapse of a building, and primary middens, and all are rare. Floors and abandonment deposits are normally not preserved at these sites, probably due to their destruction by subsequent agricultural works, resulting in only sunken structures and their fills being found. The faunal remains that are recovered in primary middens at these sites suggest that they are related to the disposal of domestic refuse. However, the identification of primary deposits through faunal remains mainly relies on the presence of (semi)complete animal carcasses or articulated anatomical parts (i.e. complete limbs or a bone and its unfused epiphyses) and these, despite being common, are always less frequent than the non-primary deposits.

Please cite this article in press as: Grau Sologestoa, I., Waste management at early medieval rural sites in northern Spain: Taphonomic issues for interpreting faunal remains, Quaternary International (2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2013.12.016

4

I. Grau Sologestoa / Quaternary International xxx (2013) 1e12

(Semi)complete animal carcasses are very common in early medieval rural settlements all over Europe and the reasons for their presence have been widely discussed elsewhere. There is currently a debate on whether these deposits could be regarded as ritual or special (Hamerow, 2006) or not (Morris and Jervis, 2011). Morris (2011) uses the term ‘Associated Bone Groups’ (or ABGs) in order to avoid influencing the interpretation of these deposits. At the sites that we have studied, various ABGs have been identified. All were found in contexts filling abandoned silos, indicating their secondary use as locations for refuse. Details of these ABGs are offered in Table 1. The approximate age of the animals has been calculated using the fusion stage of the epiphysis as suggested by Silver (1963). We believe that none of the ABGs that we have studied at early medieval rural sites in Spain can certainly be interpreted as special or ritual. Their presence can be explained by different reasons, related to which type of animals they are.

Table 1. Vigil-Escalera (2013: 131e132) noted that the structures that were filled slowly, likely due to natural processes, are located at the peripheries of the domestic structures, while the ones that were abandoned and filled rapidly are located in their vicinity. The presence of some species that create their dens underground (such as lagomorphs, very frequent in rural sites in central Iberian Peninsula e Grau, in press), brings out the question of whether their remains are contemporary to the archaeological contexts or if they were incorporated afterwards, and if so, when did that happen. At La Indiana, in Madrid, the remains of lagomophs have been interpreted as intrusive, but their synchronism or diachronism with the context remains unclear (Morales and García, 2002), as well as in Gózquez, also in Madrid (Morales and Pino, 2000).

Table 1 ABGs found at these sites. MNI: Minimum Number of Individuals. Site

Chronol.

CTX

Taxon

MNI

Approx age

Zornoztegi

8the10th

Zaballa

8the12th 8the10th

1606 4119 1647 1809 6511

Bos taurus Bos taurus Felis catus Canis familiaris Sus Ovis/Capra Canis familiaris Bos taurus Sus Felis catus Ovis/Capra Canis familiaris Amphibian Canis familiaris Felis catus Galliform Equus Amphibian () Sus Equus Canis familiaris

2 1 1 1 2 5 1 2 3 1 1 4 1 2 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 3

1.5 years 2 years Adult Adult 1 year 1 year 1.5 years 2.5 years Neonatal Adult Adult Foetal

Homo sapiens

7

4 adults, 4 infants

Amphibian Lagomorph Oryctolagus Canis familiaris Equus

2 1 1 1 1

Juvenile Juvenile Adult

6740 Aistra S. Martín de Dulantzi Pelícano (sector 9)

6the7th 8the10th m.5them.6th

858 339 9165 9201 9204 9365

m.6them.7th

9380 9628 9657 9705 9174

9176 9183 9190

4.1.1. Microfauna There is a tendency to consider the presence of small animals in these contexts as intrusive, as they are unlikely to have been accumulated by predators. Micromammals, reptiles and amphibians are frequently found in the contexts that fill the sunken featured structures, sometimes at the bottom. It is possible that, if pits were left empty during some time, they acted as natural traps for these small animals (García-Blanco and Vila, 2007). There is no evidence suggesting that these animals were consumed by early medieval rural people, but they constitute a good opportunity to reconstruct the environment of the site, as well as some aspects of site history, such as episodes of abandonment of certain structures (Reitz, 1994; Stahl, 1996). In Zaballa, some amphibian remains were found in a context (8the10th centuries AD) where evidence of scleratia fungus was also recovered, indicating that this area was perhaps flooded for some time (Grau, 2012: 449). Various amphibians were also found at the bottom of some silos at El Pelícano, as is shown in

Foetal Juvenile Adult Adult Group of large vertebrae Neonatal 6 months Adult

Observations

Cut mark in prox. femur

One of them chopped in the atlas On-site breeding

Posterior limb, gnawed by carnivores

On-site breeding Anterior limb One is a brachymel dog with canines smoothed down post-mortem. (Analysis of human remains by C. Sampedro, unpublished) Lower limbs

Cranium and vertebrae

Fig. 1. Details of the mandibles of the dog found in context 9174 at El Pelícano. Photo by I. Grau and I. Sopelana.

Please cite this article in press as: Grau Sologestoa, I., Waste management at early medieval rural sites in northern Spain: Taphonomic issues for interpreting faunal remains, Quaternary International (2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2013.12.016

I. Grau Sologestoa / Quaternary International xxx (2013) 1e12

4.1.2. Companions or pets Complete dogs and cats are frequently found in the deposits filling the sunken featured structures. There is no evidence supporting that their meat was consumed, although perhaps cats’ fur was utilized, as has been seen at Zornoztegi (Grau, 2009) and La Indiana (Morales and García, 2002). Peasants probably kept dogs and cats as long as they were useful for them (for herding, hunting and controlling rodents). Therefore, these animals were discarded once they died of natural causes. It is, however, possible that these animals had a special consideration among peasants; for example, at El Pelícano, we found a brachymel dog whose canines were smoothed down post-mortem. Also at El Pelícano, in two different silos, two ABGs of foetal or neonatal dogs were found, that perhaps died as a result of complications during their birth.

4.1.3. Macrofauna The frequent presence of complete carcasses of animal species that were certainly consumed at rural sites, such as cattle, sheep, goat and pig, is more difficult to explain, and is currently under debate. In pre- or proto-historic sites, their occurrence is often explained by symbolic reasons, whereas in medieval contexts, specialists tend to search for more pragmatic or functional causes. Consequently, the way these deposits are interpreted may be linked to our knowledge and preconceptions of each period of human history (Morris, 2012: 11). Why were these carcasses discarded? Causes can be multiple, such as diseases (sometimes epizootic, when carcasses of different species are found within the same context) or an environmental catastrophe (Weigelt, 1999; Lubinski and O’Brien, 2001; Newsfield, 2006; Broderick, 2012). VigilEscalera (2013a) also suggested that rotten or spoiled cuts of meat could have been discarded as complete. Any of these explanations can be applied to most of the cases shown in Table 1. However, there are four aspects of the macrofaunal ABGs: - Two complete carcasses of cattle were found inside a silo in Zaballa, and one of them had a chop mark on the atlas, which

5

suggests that this animal may have been slaughtered and then discarded, perhaps because of an illness. - Complete carcasses of domestic fowl have been found at El Pelícano, Gózquez and La Indiana. We wonder if some of these could represent food waste e for example, if they were cooked without being dismembered, they could have been discarded also still complete. - At Gózquez, numerous carcasses of equids were recovered. At El Pelícano, on the contrary, various ABGs correspond to certain anatomical parts (vertebrae or limbs), and in one case, it was gnawed by carnivores. This may suggest that perhaps equid carcasses were being dismembered at El Pelícano for feeding the dogs. However, the young age of slaughter of many of the equids suggests that their meat was being consumed by peasants. Equids from Cárcava de la Peladera (Bellver, 1999) and Ladera de los Prados (Bellver, 2001) are also young. - The context number 9174 at El Pelícano is a remarkable case where seven human bodies of different ages and three complete dog carcasses were recovered inside a silo that was no longer being used as such. The occurrence of two amphibians at the bottom suggests that the pit was probably empty and abandoned. The burial of this group of humans was not done carefully, but it rather seems that the bodies were hurriedly thrown inside the silo, together with the dogs. Is this a case of epizootic mortality, perhaps some pest that affected humans and domestic animals at the same time? As suggested by Vigil-Escalera (2013b), it appears that, in any case, these humans were buried excluded from the peasant community at the settlement. The humeri of one of the dogs show no supratrochlear foramen and, together with other long bones, appear to be stocky and twisted, characteristic of brachymel dogs, dwarf and genetically achondroplastic (Figure 11.45) (Baxter, 2006, 2010). The fact that one of the dogs was probably brachymelic and also had its canines smoothed down (probably post-mortem, as it would have been extremely painful to saw them off exposing the pulp cavity when the animal was alive, see Fig.1), also suggests that this animal had special consideration from the inhabitants at El Pelícano.

Fig. 2. Percentage of body part representation in relation to the most common body part (by MNI). Zaballa, 8the10th C. MNI: cattle, 4; sheep-goat, 9; pig, 4.

Please cite this article in press as: Grau Sologestoa, I., Waste management at early medieval rural sites in northern Spain: Taphonomic issues for interpreting faunal remains, Quaternary International (2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2013.12.016

6

I. Grau Sologestoa / Quaternary International xxx (2013) 1e12

Fig. 3. Percentage of body part representation in relation to the most common body part (by MNI). Aistra, 6the7th C. (above), MNI: cattle, 4; sheep-goat, 8; pig, 4. Aistra, 8the9th C. (below), MNI: cattle, 5; sheep-goat, 7; pig, 5.

4.2. Non-primary deposits Non-primary deposits include all archaeological contexts that have formed as a consequence of material being re-deposited from its original location. Such deposits are not easily identified through faunal remains, unless the bone fragments that are recovered from the same context present very different taphonomic histories. As an example, in context 9043 at El Pelícano (sector 9), dated to the end of the 5th century AD, a mixture of food refuse and worked bone and antler was found, with some remains gnawed by carnivores, some with cut marks, some with trampling marks, and a different degree of preservation of the cortical bone. Archaeological evidence available until now suggests that this type of deposit is the commonest in early medieval rural sites in the Iberian Peninsula, and indicates that in most cases, peasant communities had another primary location for the refuse that they generated (ash, food waste, broken ceramic pots, dung, grain straw, sub-products of artisanal activities) (Vigil-Escalera, 2013a: 135), and then they moved large quantities of this rubbish when they needed to fill in structures that were no longer functional. Schiffer (1972, 1987) provided some ethnographic examples of modern agricultural communities that clean the area within the village periodically, picking up all the rubbish and dumping it on a midden. Something similar might have happened in early medieval villages, which implies that rubbish was often redeposited elsewhere. This process of re-depositing the materials that had already been discarded elsewhere is visible in two cases:

- Archaeological materials that are broken into pieces, which are sometimes found in different pits. This was the case, for example, of some ceramic pots from Gózquez (Vigil-Escalera, 2013a: 135) and Zornoztegi (Elorza, 2010), and of a handle made with deer antler recovered from two different post holes at Aistra that did not belong to the same building. In one of these post holes, a great quantity of microfossils of Sordariaceae was found (B. Hernández, personal communication), a fungus that is normally associated with excrements, indicating that this deposit was probably domestic refuse. - Residual archaeological material. This, again, is extremely difficult to recognise through the analysis of faunal materials, but it is more visible in pottery (through the degree of fragmentation, coherence of the ceramic assemblage, reuse of ceramics, etc.). In Zornoztegi, for example, excavators have suggested that the site was occupied between the 1st and the 3rd centuries, thanks to the presence of residual material in contexts dated afterwards. The frequent occurrence of re-deposition and, moreover, the combination of primary and non-primary deposits within the same structure, at early medieval rural sites suggests that the systems of rubbish disposal were quite complex in peasant communities, perhaps involving some communal work in order to keep the settlement clean. This general complexity of the waste management brings out some questions that are of key importance not only for interpreting the faunal remains but also to reconstruct the site history, but answering these questions is not an easy task. How can we infer the original function of the

Please cite this article in press as: Grau Sologestoa, I., Waste management at early medieval rural sites in northern Spain: Taphonomic issues for interpreting faunal remains, Quaternary International (2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2013.12.016

I. Grau Sologestoa / Quaternary International xxx (2013) 1e12

structure if there are no primary deposits within it? Which was the primary location for discarding the refuse that was later redeposited elsewhere? To which extent may we be overlooking residual older faunal material, as suggested by the residual pottery? How can we be sure of the chronology of all non-primary deposits? 4.3. Biostratinomy and diagenesis This section focuses on the major biostratinomic and diagenetic processes that have biased the assemblages, and have also added valuable information in order to understand formation processes of the archaeological record and the human society that produced it (Stallibrass, 2007; Orton, 2010). 4.3.1. Preservation The proportion of identified elements (NISP) when compared to the total number of fragments (Table 2) at these five sites is high. All sites were sampled for flotation and faunal remains were retrieved by fine sieving the residues from the flotation. This has probably contributed to the high number of unidentified fragments, as hundreds of bone splinters were incorporated in the assemblages. Table 2 Proportion of identified specimens (NISP) compared to the total number of fragments. Site

Number fragments

NISP

% of identified fragments

Sampling method

Zornoztegi Zaballa Aistra S. Martín de Dulantzi Pelícano (9)

8858 9864 6924 1268 10,403

1638 1150 1447 334 2100

18.5% 11.7% 20.9% 26.3% 20.2%

Sieved þ flot. Flot. Flot. Flot. Flot.

In most cases, the Minimum Number of Individuals (MNI) is provided by dental pieces, as they are more likely to survive the effects of physical agents of destruction thanks to their histological composition and structure. The analysis of body part frequencies of early medieval phases is shown in Figs. 2e4. Zornoztegi and San Martín de Dulantzi have been excluded from this analysis due to the small sample dated to the Early Middle Ages. Although density mediated attrition and differential destruction (Binford, 1981; Lyman, 1984; Lam et al., 1999; Munson and Garniewicz, 2003) have undoubtedly played a role in the underrepresentation of some anatomical elements, most anatomical parts of the main domestic animals are present in every assemblage studied here, including the cranium, ribs and vertebrae (which were not quantified, but their presence was recorded, according to the recording protocol). We believe that the absence or reduced number of some elements that are likely to survive the effects of agents of destruction, such as carpal bones or third phalanges, is more probably due to problems of excavation and recovery, rather than to their destruction by diagenetic agents. Despite the small size of some of the samples, as shown in Figs. 2 to 4, there is no clear selection of certain body parts in any of these sites. This, together with the evidence suggesting the occurrence of primary and secondary butchery activities on site, implies that livestock was generally raised at these settlements (also supported by the presence of perinatal animals in some cases, see Table 1), slaughtered, skinned, dismembered and consumed inside the village. It is, however, likely that density mediated attrition has had a major impact on the underrepresentation of young animals. Fig. 4 shows that cattle crania are underrepresented at El Pelícano in contrast to other sites and taxa, where the MNI is provided by dental elements. At El Pelícano, the MNI of cattle is given by the metatarsals. This is

7

unlikely to be a result of taphonomic processes, as teeth survive physical agents of destruction better. Two possible explanations are: either cattle crania were discarded elsewhere, or the importance of cattle metatarsals as raw materials for creating bone anvils (Grau, 2012) resulted in a high number of these elements at El Pelícano. Diagenetic factors have undoubtedly biased the faunal assemblages considered here, but they are the major biasing factors in other areas of the northern Iberian Peninsula. The lithological characteristics of most of the northwestern area, with an acid pH and a very humid weather, cause the destruction of most osseous material (Fernández, 2010; Costa, 2011). 4.3.2. Estimating biases The application of the taphonomic indicators has provided valuable information for identifying some of the main factors affecting the animal bone assemblages and for estimating possible biases in these remains. The standardisation of the indicators has allowed us to compare the different samples both at an intra-site and at an inter-site level. The figures are expressed in terms of proportions; we provide the total numbers used for each indicator in Tables 3 to 6. Although, in some cases, the poor preservation of the bone surfaces may have affected the observation of butchery marks, in all the five sites considered here, butchered bones and burnt bones constitute a very small percentage of the faunal assemblages.

Table 3 Indicator 1: total number (corrected NISP) of first and second molars (upper and lower). Site

Phase

Cattle

Sheepegoat

Pig

Zornoztegi

Late Roman Early Medieval High Medieval Mid. 5themid. 6th Mid. 6themid. 7th 6the7th 8the10th 10the13th 13the15th 6the7th 8the9th 10the12th 1ste3rd 5the7th 8the10th 11the13th

47.33 25 5 27.66 3 0 17 9 4 20.33 32.66 42.66 6.33 2 5 0.66

116.83 11.32 13 185.33 31 1 58 16.33 10.66 50 35 70,66 16 18 2 4

23.16 10 1 33 11.66 2 15 15 9 22.66 22.32 27.66 2 7.66 1 1

El Pelícano Zaballa

Aistra

San Martín

Table 4 Indicator 2: total NISP (corrected). Site

Phase

Cattle

Sheepegoat

Pig

Equids

Zornoztegi

Late Roman Early Medieval High Medieval Mid. 5th-mid. 6th Mid. 6th-mid. 7th 6the7th 8the10th 10the13th 13the15th 6the7th 8the9th 10the12th 1ste3rd 5the7th 8the10th 11the13th

201.5 136 12 199 37.5 5 150 9 31.5 84 90 135.5 39.5 11 15 6.5

365.5 36 23 667 136 1 303 41 35 125 84 159 34 49 15 9

104.75 32 8 240.5 41 5 152 63.5 31 136 84 159 11 24 5 11

4 18 2 110 22 0 17 3 8 8 13 23 2 1 0 0

El Pelícano Zaballa

Aistra

San Martín

Please cite this article in press as: Grau Sologestoa, I., Waste management at early medieval rural sites in northern Spain: Taphonomic issues for interpreting faunal remains, Quaternary International (2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2013.12.016

8

I. Grau Sologestoa / Quaternary International xxx (2013) 1e12

Table 5 Indicator 3: Total NISP (corrected) of postcranial bones. Site

Phase

Cattle

Sheep-goat

Pig

Equids

Zornoztegi

Late Roman Early Medieval High Medieval Mid. 5th-mid. 6th Mid. 6th-mid. 7th 6the7th 8the10th 10the13th 13the15th 6the7th 8the9th 10the12th 1ste3rd 5the7th 8the10th 11the13th

90.5 76 7 136 31.5 5 57 3 24.5 40 17 43.5 12.5 5 4 3.5

58.5 3 6 201 59 1 121 19 5 17 11 25 3 10 11 2

15.75 8 0 66.5 5 1 45 31.5 3 28 10.5 25.5 2 4 2 1

3 7 0 63 10 0 6 0 2 2 3 4 1 0 0 0

El Pelícano Zaballa

Aistra

San Martín

Table 6 Indicator 4: Total NISP (corrected) of isolated teeth. Site

Phase

Cattle

Sheep-goat

Pig

Zornoztegi

Late Roman Early Medieval Mid. 5th-mid. 6th Mid. 6th-mid. 7th 6the7th 8the10th 10the13th 13the15th

54 35 25 4 0 22 0 2

157 16 86 16 0 18 0 0

33 14 34 4 2 22 5 4

El Pelícano Zaballa

Indicator 4 is shown in Fig. 5. In Zornoztegi, for example, the comparison of indicator number 4, between the different phases at the site, has shown that the recovery and sampling methods were more efficient for the early medieval contexts than for the late Roman ones, probably because the archaeobotanist that designed the sampling strategy preferred to take the samples from sunken featured structures, while most of the late Roman bone assemblage was found in a midden layer. At sector 9 of El Pelícano, the recovery methods had very similar biasing effects on both phases shown in Fig. 5 and, therefore, possible differences between the two phases are not related to recovery bias. The analysis of indicator 4 has not been used for Aistra and San Martín, due to their small number of isolated teeth. In Zaballa, indicator 4 has only been calculated for the period dated between the 8th and the 10th centuries due to the small sample size of other phases at this site. The high proportion of isolated teeth in Zaballa may attest to a good recovery of the faunal remains during the excavation of this site. Indicators 1, 2 and 3 have been plotted in Fig. 6, showing the preservation and fragmentation stage of the faunal assemblages from each site in a diachronic perspective, comparing different periods. The high level of fragmentation of these faunal assemblages is shown by the high percentages of teeth compared to the postcranial bones (indicator 2), together with the high number of isolated molars compared to the ones that are still in the jaws and maxillae (indicator 1). In general, the percentages of indicators 1 and 2 do not vary substantially between different phases of the same site, suggesting that the high levels of fragmentation remained. At Zornoztegi, values are quite similar. The lower percentage of isolated molars during the 11the12th centuries is

Fig. 4. Percentage of body part representation in relation to the most common body part (by MNI). El Pelícano, m. 5them.6th C. (above), MNI: cattle, 8; sheep-goat, 38; pig, 11. El Pelícano, m.6them.7th C. (below), MNI: cattle, 3; sheep-goat, 5; pig, 3.

Please cite this article in press as: Grau Sologestoa, I., Waste management at early medieval rural sites in northern Spain: Taphonomic issues for interpreting faunal remains, Quaternary International (2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2013.12.016

I. Grau Sologestoa / Quaternary International xxx (2013) 1e12

Fig. 5. Proportion of isolated incisors compared to the total number of isolated teeth (Indicator 4) in contexts from Zornoztegi (above), El Pelícano (middle) and Zaballa (below).

probably due to a recovery bias or to a smaller fragmentation index, and not to a change in butchery activity, as the proportion of teeth is high. However, the low proportion of gnawed bones (indicator 3) in this period may suggest a more rapid covering of the rubbish, favouring less fragmentation.

9

At Zaballa, the high level of fragmentation does not change significantly between the different periods. The preservation of the cortical bone was similar in all phases, so a poor visibility of the gnawing marks in subsequent periods does not explain the very high percentage of gnawed bones during the first phase (6the7th centuries). This may suggest that the system of waste disposal was different at that time, implying that either the rubbish was not properly covered or that most bones were given to dogs before being discarded. The assemblage of animal remains recovered in Aistra was also highly fragmented and was severely damaged by taphonomic processes. The values of the three indicators suffered no remarkable changes between the different periods. The high percentages of indicators 1 and 2 at San Martín de Dulantzi suggest that the bone assemblage is highly fragmented. The low proportion of isolated molars in the second phase is probably due to a recovery bias. The activity of scavengers was more prominent between the 5th and the 7th centuries, although it does not seem to be a really determinant factor for the preservation of the faunal remains. The good preservation of the faunal remains from San Martín during the 8the10th centuries is related to a low incidence of gnawing. In Roman levels of San Martín, some bone fragments show marks of plant roots and marks produced by water erosion, suggesting that animal remains were not deposited very deep in the soil, or perhaps left on the floor. At sector 9 of El Pelícano, there is no apparent change either in the waste disposal systems or the levels of fragmentation, as all indicators are almost equal in both early medieval phases. In general, the assemblage from El Pelícano is well preserved, and only in a few cases natural taphonomic factors substantially damaged the bone surface. In contexts dated between the mid 5th and the mid 6th centuries, some examples of concretions (both mineral and metallic), water corrosion and dehydration (perhaps due to their exposure to the open air, as suggested for La Indiana eMorales and García, 2002: 30e31) were found. In contexts attributed to the mid 6th-mid 7th centuries at El Pelícano, water corrosion has also been identified, as well as root marks. Some bone fragments with evident weathering (Behrensmeyer, 1978) marks were found in a level that was interpreted as a pavement. All the others suggest that faunal materials that were once deposited on the floor or not very deep were later re-deposited elsewhere, as they were found in the fills of sunken featured structures. In many zooarchaeological regional syntheses, the taxonomic proportions, anatomical representation, and/or kill-off patterns are compared, but the differences in preservation and fragmentation of the assemblages are only rarely taken into account. In Fig. 7, indicators 1 and 2 of different faunal assemblages recovered in early medieval contexts at the five sites considered here is shown. The highest levels of fragmentation (Indicator 1) are those from San Martín (8the10th C.), Aistra (6the7th C.) and Aistra (8the10th C.), being the proportion of isolated molars more than 50%. The highest incidence of taphonomic factors on the preservation of the materials (Indicator 2) are in Aistra (8the10th c.), San Martín (5the7th C.) and Aistra (6the7th C.), being the proportion of teeth more than 70% of the NISP. Nevertheless, in all sites teeth constitute more than 50% of the faunal assemblages, providing evidence of their poor preservation and good recovery. Indicators 1 and 2 are to some extent independent of each other: the degree of fragmentation (indicator 1) does not necessarily correlate with the degree of preservation (indicator 2), probably implying that pre-depositional factors (such as butchery) account for much of the variation in the degree of fragmentation. In Fig. 8, Indicator 3 is shown. The proportion of gnawed bones is extremely high in Zaballa (6the7th c.), but less than the 20% in most of the assemblages. However, the small size of the sample of

Please cite this article in press as: Grau Sologestoa, I., Waste management at early medieval rural sites in northern Spain: Taphonomic issues for interpreting faunal remains, Quaternary International (2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2013.12.016

10

I. Grau Sologestoa / Quaternary International xxx (2013) 1e12

Fig. 6. Indicators 1, 2 and 3 in different phases at Zornoztegi (above, left), Zaballa (above, right), Aistra (middle, left), San Martín (middle, right) and El Pelícano (below).

that phase in Zaballa requires treating this high proportion with caution. In conclusion, the application of these standardised indicators to the taphonomic analysis of the five sites considered here has helped in understanding possible fragmentation, preservation and recovery biases introduced to the faunal assemblages by some of the main taphonomic factors. Furthermore, the comparison of these indicators at an intra-site and an inter-site level alerts us to the complications of interpreting faunal assemblages that may have very different taphonomic histories and, therefore, may be biased in different ways.

5. Conclusion In general terms, evidence suggests that in early medieval rural sites three different modes of waste management existed (Foreman et al., 2002: 62-64; Miret, 2006: 221; Quirós, 2012: 66): centralized locations for middens, where both domestic and production (artisanal or farming) residues are found; individual or specialised middens, where materials are more homogeneous, responding to a single type of activity (Reitz and Wing, 1999) (e.g., constructive materials, or food waste, or artisanal/farming residues), which suggests that the system of spatial organization and waste

Please cite this article in press as: Grau Sologestoa, I., Waste management at early medieval rural sites in northern Spain: Taphonomic issues for interpreting faunal remains, Quaternary International (2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2013.12.016

I. Grau Sologestoa / Quaternary International xxx (2013) 1e12

Fig. 7. Proportion of isolated molars (indicator 1) and proportion of teeth (indicator 2) in early medieval faunal assemblages.

management was different to the previous system; and rapid deposition (e.g. ABGs). It is very likely that the first two systems implied the use of this waste for fertilizing the fields, and their posterior re-deposition for filling sunken featured structures that were no longer functional for their original purpose. At the five sites studied, faunal assemblages suffered the incidence of different taphonomic factors that have fragmented the remains and caused their poor preservation. Major factors were: - Complicated systems for managing the refuse at these villages, that at the same time have contributed to the scarcity of primary deposits, to the difficulties on interpreting the function of the structures, to problems of quantification of the faunal remains, and in establishing the chronology of the deposit (due to the presence of some older materials). - Natural factors such as acid soils, density mediated attrition, weathering, water corrosion, dehydration, etc. Butchery and burning, on the contrary, were not a key factor for the preservation and fragmentation. - Scavengers, mainly carnivores, probably dogs. - Excavation methods and sampling strategies.

Fig. 8. Proportion of gnawed bones (indicator 3) in early medieval faunal assemblages.

11

In consequence, in many of these rural sites, faunal assemblages are small and identifiable animal bones are few. Commonly, hundreds of different archaeological contexts provide faunal remains in these settlements, and most of them have only a few bone fragments. This, as explained by O’Connor (1985), is the nightmare of ‘lots of little bag-fulls’, which means that to obtain a relatively large sample it is necessary to merge data from contexts belonging to the same archaeological phase, but to do so, understanding the formation processes of such contexts is needed. For the interpretation of the faunal remains, understanding the formation processes of the archaeological contexts and estimating to which extent the different taphonomic factors (either biostratinomic or diagenetic) have affected and biased the assemblages, it is absolutely necessary, not only for constructing the intra-site history of the settlement and its inhabitants, but also in order to be able to proceed with regional synthesis comparing the results from different sites. For example, a high rate of gnawed bones in a given sample (e.g. Zaballa during the 6the7th centuries), may mean that this assemblage should be excluded from regional comparisons, due to the probable loss of most fragile and smallest fragments. Choosing a sampling method that benefits taking samples from certain types of contexts may result in a recovery bias towards particular assemblages (e.g. in Zornoztegi, our analysis has shown that sampling methods were more efficient for the early medieval contexts than the Late Roman ones), which may produce the underrepresentation of small taxa, young individuals and small anatomical elements. Taphonomic issues have been rarely confronted in farming settlements (Serjeantson, 1991), and until now, taphonomic approaches to early medieval faunal remains of the Iberian Peninsula were lacking. Perhaps the stratigraphic excavation methods that are commonly practiced in sites of historic chronologies in Spain should be revisited, paying more attention to the processes of the formation of archaeological contexts, geoarchaeology and taphonomy (Roskams, 2003). This paper constitutes the first attempt of making a reflection about site formation processes, and problems related to fragmentation, preservation and recovery biases that have affected the assemblages of animal remains in various rural sites in the Basque Country and Madrid, through utilizing a methodology that allows intra-site and inter-site comparisons, a not very common perspective in taphonomic analysis.

Acknowledgments We would like to thank the following people for helping us preparing this paper, for different reasons: J.A. Quirós, U. Albarella, I. Sopelana, B. Hernández, A. Vigil-Escalera, K. Sechidis, J. Niso and M. Loza. We are grateful to the reviewers, who helped us to improve this paper with their appropriate comments. Also, we would like to thank the organisers of the ICAZ Taphonomy WG meeting in Santander for their effort, as well as to all attendants for their interest. We would like to thank all the colleagues that, through the Zooarch mailing list (which once more proved to be really useful), helped me with the analysis of the canid remains from El Pelícano. These colleagues were R. Wright, D. Bennett, D. Walker, L. Broderick, A. Ervynck, S. Tofts, G. Carter, J. Weber, G. Campbell, M. Groot, A.B. Marín, A. Locker and O. Putelat. The faunal remains from San Martín were analysed thanks to funding given by the Basque Government for inventorying archaeological materials. The materials from the other sites were studied within the research project “La formación de los paisajes medievales en el Norte Peninsular y en Europa” (HUM 2009-07079) funded by the Ministry of Science and Innovation.

Please cite this article in press as: Grau Sologestoa, I., Waste management at early medieval rural sites in northern Spain: Taphonomic issues for interpreting faunal remains, Quaternary International (2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2013.12.016

12

I. Grau Sologestoa / Quaternary International xxx (2013) 1e12

References Albarella, U., Davis, S.J.M., 1994. The Saxon and Medieval Animal Bones Excavated in 1985e1989 from West Cotton, Northamptonshire. AML report 17/94. Bar-Oz, G., Munro, N.D., 2004. Beyond cautionary tales: a multivariate taphonomic approach for resolving equifinality in zooarchaeological studies. Journal of Taphonomy 2, 201e221. Behrensmeyer, A.K., 1978. Taphonomic and ecologic information from bone weathering. Paleobiology 4 (2), 150e162. Bellver Garrido, J.A., 1999. Informe zooarqueológico del yacimiento de Cárcava de la Peladera (Hontoria, Segovia). unpublished. Bellver Garrido, J.A., 2001. Informe zooarqueológico del yacimiento de Ladera de los Prados (Aguasal, Valladolid). unpublished. Bennett, J.L., 1999. Thermal alteration of buried bone. Journal of Archaeological Science 26, 1e8. Binford, L.R., 1981. Patterns of bone modifications produced by nonhuman agents. In: Binford, L.R. (Ed.), Bones: Ancient Men and Modern Myths. Academic Press, London, pp. 35e86. Costa, C., 2011. Conservação diferencial das faunas e sua relação com a acidez dos sedimentos/solos. unpublished. In: Paper Presented at the JIA Conference in Faro, Portugal, May 2011. Davis, S.J.M., 1992. A Rapid Method for Recording Information about Mammal Bones from Archaeological Sites. AML Report 19/92. Elorza González de Alaiza, L., 2010. El registro cerámico del despoblado de Zornoztegi. unpublished, DEA dissertation presented in Vitoria-Gasteiz. UPV-EHU. Fernández Rodríguez, C., 2010. Faunas arqueológicas del noroeste de la Península Ibérica. In: Bettencourt, A.M.S., Caetano Alves, M.I., Monteiro-Rodrigues, S. (Eds.), Variaçoes paleoambientais e evolução antrópica no Quaternário do Ocidente Peninsular. APEQ and CITCEM, Braga, pp. 97e112. Foreman, S., Hiller, J., Petts, D., 2002. Gathering the People, Settling the Land. The Archaeology of a Middle Thames Landscape. Anglo-saxon to Post-medieval, Oxford. García-Blanco, V., Vila, S., 2007. Restos animales y vegetales del yacimiento visigodo de Prado de los Galápagos, interpretación ambiental, Zona arqueológica. In: La investigación arqueológica de época visigoda en la Comunidad de Madrid. la cultura material,, vol. III, pp. 962e972. Grau-Sologestoa, I., 2009. Ganadería en la Alta Edad Media. Estudio comparativo de los yacimientos alaveses de Zornoztegi, Zaballa y Salvatierra-Agurain. Munibe Antropologia-arkeologia 60, 253e280. Grau-Sologestoa, I., 2012. Agriculture and ironwork in the Middle Ages: new evidence of bone anvils in Spain. Munibe Antropologia-arkeologia 63, 305e319. Grau-Sologestoa, I., 2013. El registro faunístico de los asentamientos rurales altomedievales. In: Quirós Castillo, J.A. (Ed.), El poblamiento rural de época visigoda en Hispania. Arqueología del campesinado en el interior peninsular, Documentos de Arqueología Medieval 6. Bilbao (in press). Hamerow, H., 2006. ‘Special deposits’ in Anglo-Saxon settlements. Medieval Archaeology 50, 1e30. Lam, Y.M., Chen, Xingbin, Pearson, O.M., 1999. Intertaxonomic variability in patterns of bone density and the differential preservation of Bovid, Cervid and Equid elements in the archaeological record. American Antiquity 64 (2), 343e362. Lubinski, P.M., O’Brien, C.J., 2001. Observations on seasonality and mortality from a recent catastrophic death assemblage. Journal of Archaeological Science 28, 833e842. Lyman, R.L., 1984. Bone density and differential survivorship of fossil classes. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 3, 259e299. Miret i Mestre, J., 2006. Sobre les sitges i alters estructures excavades al subsòl. Cypsela 16, 213e225. Morales, A., Pino, B., 2000. Gózquez (S. Martín de la Vega, Madrid: estudio preliminar de la fauna, en especial la de mamíferos). unpublished. Laboratorio de Arqueozoología-UAM. Informe técnico LAZ 2000/4. Morales, A., García, J., 2002. La fauna del yacimiento de La Indiana (Pinto, Madrid). Una síntesis en torno a los mamíferos. unpublished. Laboratorio de Arqueozoología-UAM. Informe técnico LAZ 2002/4. Morris, J., 2011. Investigating animal burials: ritual, mundane and beyond. In: BAR British Series. Archaeopress, Oxford.

Morris, J., 2012. Animal ‘ritual’ killing: from remains to meanings. In: Pluskowski, A. (Ed.), The Ritual Killing and Burial of Animals. European Perspectives. Oxbow, Oxford, pp. 8e21. Morris, J., Jervis, B., 2011. What’s so Special? A Reinterpretation of Anglo-Saxon ‘special’ deposits. Medieval Archaeology 55. Munson, P.J., Garniewicz, R.C., 2003. Age-mediated survivorship of ungulate mandibles and teeth in canid-ravaged faunal assemblages. Journal of Archaeological Science 30, 405e416. Newsfield, T., 2006. A Great Destruction of Cattle: The Impact and Extent of Epizootic Disease in Early Fourteenth-century Northwestern Europe. University of Toronto. Nicholson, R.A., 1993. A morphological investigation of burnt animal bone and an evaluation of its utility in archaeology. Journal of Archaeological Science 20, 411e428. O’Connor, T.P., 1985. On quantifying vertebrates esome sceptical observations. Circaea 3 (1), 27e30. Orton, D.C., 2010. Taphonomy and interpretation: an analytical framework for social zooarchaeology. International Journal of Osteoarchaeology, 1002e1202. Quirós Castillo, J.A., 2009a. Arqueología de los espacios agrarios medievales en el País Vasco. HISPANIA, Revista Española de Historia LXIX (233), 619e652. Quirós Castillo, J.A. (Ed.), 2009b. The Archaeology of Early Medieval Villages in Europe. Documentos de Arqueología Medieval (1). UPV-EHU, Bilbao. Quirós Castillo, J.A. (Ed.), 2012. Arqueología del campesinado medieval: la aldea de Zaballa. Documentos de Arqueología Medieval 3. UPV-EHU, Bilbao. Reitz, E.J., 1994. The wells of Spanish Florida: using taphonomy to identify site history. Journal of Ethnnobiology 14 (2), 141e160. Reitz, E., Wing, E., 1999. Disposal of faunal remains and sample recovery. In: Reitz, E., Wing, E. (Eds.), Zooarchaeology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 110e141. Roskams, S., 2003. Teoría y práctica de la excavación. Crítica, Barcelona. Schiffer, M.B., 1972. Archaeological context and systemic context. American Antiquity 37 (2), 156e165. Schiffer, M.B., 1987. Formation Processes of the Archaeological Record. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque. Serjeantson, D., 1991. ‘Rid grasse of bones’: a taphonomic study of the bones from midden deposits at the Neolithic and Bronze Age site of Runnymede, Surrey, England. International Journal of Osteoarchaeology 1, 73e89. Shipman, P., Foster, G., Shoeninger, M., 1984. Burnt bones and teeth: an experimental study of colour, morphology, crystal structure and shrinkage. Journal of Archaeological Science 11, 307e325. Sigaut, F., 1978. Les réserves de grains a long terme: techniques de conservation et fonctions socials dans l’histoire, Lille. Silver, I.A., 1963. The ageing of domestic animals. In: Brothewell, D., Higgs, E. (Eds.), Science in Archaeology. Thames and Hudson, London, pp. 250e268. Stahl, P.W., 1996. The recovery and interpretation of microvertebrate bone assemblages from archaeological contexts. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory 3 (1), 31e75. Stallibrass, S., 2007. Taphonomy or transfiguration: do we need to change the subject? In: Pluskowski, A. (Ed.), Breaking and Shaping Beastly Bodies. Animals as Material Culture in the Middle Ages. Oxbow, Oxford, pp. 52e64. Stiner, M.C., Kuhn, S.L., Weiner, S., Bar-Yosef, O., 1995. Differential burning, recrystallization and fragmentation of archaeological bone. Journal of Archaeological Science 22, 223e237. Vigil-Escalera, A., 2013a. Ver el silo medio lleno o medio vacío: la estructura arqueológica en su contexto. In: Vigil-escalera, A., Bianchi, G., Quirós, J.A. (Eds.), Horrea, Barns and Silos. Storage and Incomes in Early Medieval Europe. Universidad del País Vasco, Bilbao, pp. 127e144. Vigil-Escalera, A., 2013b. Comunidad política aldeana y exclusión. Una revisión de las formas de inhumación altomedievales (ss. VeVIII d.C.). Reti Medieval 14 (1). Vigil-Escalera, A., Bianchi, G., Quirós, J.A. (Eds.), 2013. Horrea, Barns and Silos. Storage and Incomes in Early Medieval Europe. Documentos de Arqueología Medieval 5. UPV-EHU, Bilbao. Weigelt, J., 1999. Rezente Wirbeltierleichen und ihre paläobiologische Bedeutung, 3. Auflage. Bad Vilbel.

Please cite this article in press as: Grau Sologestoa, I., Waste management at early medieval rural sites in northern Spain: Taphonomic issues for interpreting faunal remains, Quaternary International (2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2013.12.016