7/28/2019 1970 74 (3) 291-292

1/3

A NewMethod for the Determination of the Number of Individuals inAnimal Bone Material

S. BokonyiAmerican Journal ofArchaeology, Vol. 74, No.3 (Jul., 1970),291-292.

1IIiiiiil..1IiiiII@

Stable URL:http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0002-9114%28197007%2974%3A3%3C291%3AANMFTD%3E2.0.CO%3B2-UAmerican Journal ofArchaeology is currently published by Archaeological Institute of America.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available athttp://www.jstor.org/about/terms.html. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless youhave obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, andyou may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained athttp://www .jstor.org/journals/aia.html.Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen orprinted page of such transmission.

JSTOR is an independent not-for-profit organization dedicated to creating and preserving a digital archive ofscholarly journals. For more information regarding JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

http://www .jstor.org/Tue May 31 17:26:08 2005

7/28/2019 1970 74 (3) 291-292

2/3

1970] ARCHAEOLOGICAL NOTES 291this point" (i.e., near the dam: Pritchett p. 38) mustremain a conjecture based on general topographicalprobabilities. I wonder why the lion is "now regardedas Hellenistic" (Pritchett p. 38). The hypothesis thatit could be related to the events of 422 was disprovedby excavation of the site,23 but the idea of a Hellenistic date is no more successful. My own date, on stylisticgrounds, has been ca. 360 B.C., and F. Willemmsenhas advocated the precise date of 360/59 B.C.24 Thiswas considered too early by Broneer, who advocateda date in the late fourth century. 25

GEORGE BAKALAKISUNIVERSITY OF THESSALONIKE

A NEW METHOD FOR THE DETERMINATIONOF THE NUMBER OF INDIVIDUALS IN

ANIMAL BONE MATERIALAfter the identification of animal remains from anarchaeological excavation the question arises: whatwas the proportion of the different species in the site?One method is to determine the species percentagesfrom the osteological sample. However, carcasses ofdead animals were often thrown on the settlementgarbage heaps, and their entire or nearly entire skeletons can easily change the species ratios of the fauna,therefore another method is necessary. The questionis how to determine from how many individuals thegiven bone material has come.For this purpose the determination of the "min i

mum number of individuals" has served for a longtime. In essence it has always been the number ofthe most frequently found bone (in the case of pairedbones the right or left one) that provides the minimum number of individuals in a given species, e.g.,if the left metacarpal is the cattle bone found in thegreatest numbers at a given site-say 30 examplesthen the minimum number of individual cattle was30; there were at least 30 cattle-there could be more,but not less.

This method became widespread as it was comparatively simple: one had to find only the commonestbones of the species. In recent years, however, i t hasbecome clear that the "minimum number of individuals" often did not cover the real situation.1 Attempts have been made to approximate more closelythe actual number-for example the "weighing method" of Kubasiewicz.2 This was a clever idea, as itgave data on determinat ion of the quanti ty of meatconsumed, but it sidetracked the real problem. RecentIy Krantz suggested another method,3 based on the

23 Pritchett 38 n. 27.24 Olympische Forschungen IV, 52, 56, 130.25 The Lion Monumen t at Amphipo lis (Cambridge 1941)

47-49, 52, 541 V. I. Gromova, "Mammal Remains from the Early SlavicSettlements near Voronezh" (in Russian), MIA URSS 8 (1948)113; K. Paaver, "On the Methods of Determinat ion of theRelative Importance of Mammal Species and Groups in theBone Material of Archaeological Sites" (in Russian), Eesti NSV

Teaduste Akad. Toimetised. Sere Bioi. 7 (1958) 277-290.

mandibles: from their number one can count thenumber of individuals by a simple formula. Unfortunately this method seems to me too theoretical, alsoimpractical particularly on material from Old Worldsites. Krantz' s paper, however, encouraged me tosummarize the method tha t I use for determinationof the number of individuals; I have casually mentioned the method in some earlier papers, but have nothad the opportunity to explain i t in detail.4

It is really a complex variety of the "minimum number of individuals" method. In its application thebones of the species are divided into four groups ac-cording to age: a) juvenile, b) sub-adult, c) adult, d)mature and senile. This division is simple in the caseof skulls, skull fragments, mandibles, mandible fragments and teeth, but it can be utilized also on extremity bones, even in many cases on their fragments and on vertebrae. The long bones of younganimals are open between the epiphyses and diaphyses (the connecting cartilage consists mostly oforganic material that decays in the soil) and they aremuch smaller than the adult bones of the species andbreed represented at the site. In sub-adult individualsthe space between the epiphyses and diaphyses is notperfectly closed (the cartilage has not been entirelytransformed into bone) and they show no essentialdifference in size compared to adult bones. In adultanimals epiphyses and diaphyses are entirely fused, andthe bones have reached the size characteristic of thespecies and breed. The bones of mature and senileanimals are of about the same type as those of adults,but show marks of change.

The four groups based on age can be further divided by the size of the animals; this can be easilycarried out in all age groups. In juvenile and sub-adultanimals small age differences cause comparatively bigdifferences in size; in adult, mature and senile onesthe experienced eye can separate the different sizegroups, as the variation in a given populat ion has already developed. In this way one can distinguishgroups of small, medium and large animals withinevery age group, thus providing twelve groups in eachspecies. One then determines the minimum numberof individuals in each group and adds the figures derived from the twelve groups. The "number of individuals" that I use is the sum of the "minimumnumber of individuals" of all groups. In actual practicethis usually provides a higher number than the generally used "minimum number of individuals."

An example is provided. At a given site the mostfrequently found cattle bone is the left metacarpal:2 M. Kubasiewicz, "The Methods of Studies on Animal Bonesfrom Excavat ions" ( in Polish), Mat. Zachodn. Pomorsk. 2

(1956) 235-244.3 G. S. Krantz, "A New Method of Counting Animal Bones,"

AlA 72:3 (1968) 286-288.4 S. Bokonyi, "Die friihalluviale Wirbeltierfauna Ungarns(vom Neolithikum bis zur La Tene-Zeit)," ActaArchHung I I(1959) 91 n. 175; "The Bone Material of the Excavations ofthe Royal Palace in Buda, II" (in Hunga ri an ), Budapest Regi-segei 20 (1963) 418 n. 5.

7/28/2019 1970 74 (3) 291-292

3/3

292 AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ARCHAEOLOGY [AJA 7430 pieces all from adult animals. But there are also 5juvenile right metacarpals, 8 sub-adult radii, and 2senile mandibles. With my method the number ofindividuals increases from 30 to 45. And if one determines that all 30 left metacarpals are from mediumsized animals, but in addition there are 8 adult rightmetacarpals from large and 7 from small individuals,we then have the bones not of 45 but of 60 individuals.No doubt even this is not the actual number of individuals but it does come closer.Undoubtedly the method described seems complicated. But I am convinced that it is worth the trouble,since one can get closer to the real number of animals and the real proportions of species living on agiven site. S. BOKONYI

HUNGARIAN NATIONAL MUSEUM, BUDAPEST

TWO UNUSUAL VASES OF THE ETRUSCANTORCOP GROUP: ONE WITH HEADOF EITA (HADES)

PLATE 73A conspicuous change in the normal decoration hasgiven added interest to the Torcop Group, a class ofEtruscan red-figured oinochoai (Shape VII) producedat Caere during the second half of the 4th Century

B.C. l With but rare exceptions, oinochoai of the groupshow three female heads in profile wearing a fullsakkos; one facing to the left at the neck, and twoconfronting each other on the body of the vase. However, two oinochoai-one in Paris, no. I and pI. 73,fig. I , another in Limoges, no. 2 and pI. 73, fig. 2-deserve special consideration because of their particular aberration. The Paris vase2 carries the usual configuration of decoration for oinochoai of the TorcopGroup, but substitutes a bearded male head wearing awolfskin cap for one of the female heads on the body.The Limoges vase,3 on the other hand, is consistentwith Torcop Group practice on the body of the vase,but replaces the female profile on the neck with anupright palmette executed in red-figured technique.

1. Oinochoe, Shape VII, inv. no. K471 (pI. 73, fig.I) , Paris, Musee du Louvre. H. 34.5 em.Neck: female head in profile to left with hair (including bun) completely contained by a hair-net en-1 M. Del Chiaro, "Etruscan Oinochoai of the Torcop Group,"StEtr 28 (1960) 137-164 (hereafter Torcop Group).2 I wish to thank M. Pierre Devambez, Curator of Greek

and Roman Art , Musee du Louvre for the photograph of theoinochoe, inv. no. K471, and for his kind permission to publish it in this study.

3 My grati tude is due Mme. Touchefeu-Meynier, Faculte desLettres, Nantes, for calling the Limoges oinochoe to my attention and for allowing me to publish it together with theLouvre specimen.4 Torcop Group 142ff and pI. XI . Of nearly 75 oinochoaiinc luded in this early study, 45 were. a tt ributed to the Popu-

hanced with white beads. The earring is basically apendant triangle flanked by a single bar.Body: confronting profiles; left, female with hairnet, similar to head at neck; right, bearded male wearing animal-skin (wolf) cap.White paint embellishes the three profile heads: thebeads on the hair-nets of the women, the eyes of thebearded male, the wolfskin, its sharp teeth and itsfur. In characteristic Torcop Group fashion the fleshcolor of the women was originally white, a goodlyamount of which is preserved. From the photographsI suspect the lines which appear darkest to be signsof repainting. Nevertheless these modern additionsremain fairly faithful to the ancient decoration, withthe possible exception of the eye of the female headon the body of the vase.Despite the slight signs of repainting, attribution ofthe Paris oinochoe to the Torcop Group presents nodifficulty, since the style of drawing in the femaleheads is analogous to that of an individualized artistof the group, the Populonia Torcop Painter.4 ThisCaeretan vase-painter, the most prolific of the group,is best recognized by a female profile with full-lipped,pouting mouth and, in most cases as in the profile onthe neck of the Paris oinochoe, the tip of the noseslightly hooked dovvn. It must be pointed out that theearring type on the Paris vase is not that ordinarilyrepresented by the Populonia Torcop Painter, whoprefers a single bar dangling from a button at the ear.At times, he does show a variant type composed ofthree pendant bars terminating in a single dot ordroplet. 5 A major difference to be noted between theParis oinochoe and his more usual vases is the substi tution of beaded hair-net for the more typical fullsakkos worn by the women on his oinochoai. Of fargreater significance, however, is the introduction ofan entirely new profile type-a bearded male withanimal-skin scalp.It would be almost natural at first glance to assumethat the bearded male is Hercle (Greek Herakles),but closer observation of the animal skin will revealit to be that of a wolf rather than a lion. Hence, wemust look beyond the Greek hero6 to a more characteristically Etruscan personality. Fortunately, the canine aspect of the head leads to consideration of aparallel type worn by figures in scenes of the EtruscanUnderworld. For such themes in which a beardedmale wearing wolfskin cap is found, three majorEtruscan monuments dating from the late 4th to theearly decades of the 3rd century B.C. may be cited. TwoIonia Torcop Painter.

5 Torcop Group 144, no. 3 which is illustrated in NSc(1934) 416, fig. 70, and AlA 65 (1961) pI. 31, 3.6 Herakles is known on red-figured vases produced at Caerecontemporaneously wi th oinochoai of the Torcop Group: see

M. Del Chiaro, "The Caeretan Figured Group," AlA 70 (1966)3 1 -3 6. On an oinochoe, Shape VIII (Rome, Palazzo dei Conservatori, inv. no. 115; cf. J. D. Beazley, Etruscan Vase-Painting,[Oxford 1947] 173), which I have attributed to one of thepainter s of the group-the Painter of Brussels R 27]-a fulllength figure of Herakles with lionskin and club appears together with the goddess Athena.