Ravens and Crows in Iron Age and Roman Britain

ojoa_360
85..107
D. SERJEANTSON AND J. MORRIS
RAVENS AND CROWS IN IRON AGE AND ROMAN BRITAIN
Summary. The raven and crow skeletons from Danebury are re-examined, taking into account their taphonomy, their context and the associated nds. Raven and crow burials from other Iron Age and Roman sites are surveyed, again with a discussion of their context and associated nds where these could be ascertained. Taken together, the evidence makes it clear that most if not all were deliberate burials, often at the base of pits. We demonstrate how interpretations of such burials have changed, with zooarchaeologists initially proposing functional explanations and archaeologists readier to accept that the burials were deliberate. We go on to argue that the unique character of ravens and crows, including their tolerance of humans, their scavenging habits, and their voice, led to their playing an important role in Iron Age and Roman rites and beliefs.
introduction
Skeletons of ravens and crows have been found on several Iron Age and Roman sites in Britain and elsewhere in Europe. Until the 1980s most archaeologists believed that functional interpretations could account for the birds, and such interpretations are still found in the literature, but since the late 1980s several authors have argued that the birds were buried deliberately and that the ravens and crows were an element in the deliberate deposition of animals and cultural material (Grant 1984a; Cunliffe 1992; Hill 1995; 1996; Aldhouse-Green 2001). A set of animal burials, including ravens and crows, has recently been identied in shafts in the centre of Dorchester (Woodward and Woodward 2004), which has highlighted the role of animal deposits in Roman Britain. Burials of corvids were not a common event, but did take place from time to time; at Danebury, for instance, there was a corvid skeleton in approximately one out of every 50 pits. In the rst report on the animal remains from Danebury, Grant (1984b) wrote that a number of animal bone deposits were singled out from the bulk of the bone sample because of their special associations with other bones or the manner of their deposition . . . they were in the main articulated skeletons (mainly of the common domestic animals, but also possibly including birds, fox and badger). Although it was not made clear in the Danebury reports, nearly all the birds referred to by Grant and Cunliffe were ravens or crows. Grant dened the deposits of unusual bones and skeletons as special animal deposits (SADs) to distinguish them from domestic waste which was discarded and buried without deliberate intent. Later authors have
OXFORD JOURNAL OF ARCHAEOLOGY 30(1) 85107 2011
2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd., 9600 Garsington Road, Oxford OX4 2DQ, UK and 350 Main Street Malden, MA 02148, USA.
85
given them the more neutral designation Associated Bone Groups or ABGs (Hill 1995; Morris 2008a; 2008b). In this paper we focus rst on the natural and human modications to the skeletons themselves, and then go on to look at the context in which they were found, and the material with which they were associated. Detailed discussion of taphonomy is restricted to the Danebury birds, as modications are only occasionally commented on at other sites. For context and associated nds, we have re-examined the Danebury archives and for other sites have drawn together published and unpublished data where it was available. The integration of the archaeological, zoological, taphonomic and documentary evidence has led us to revise some preconceptions about the deposits. Ravens and crows The raven (Corvus corax) (Fig. 1) has a worldwide distribution. It is found only in the north and west today, but in the Iron Age and Roman period was present all over the British Isles. The raven is the largest of the corvids and its skeletal elements are not difcult to identify. There are three other large corvids found in Britain: the carrion crow (C. corone), the hooded crow (C. cornix) and the rook (C. frugilegus). Their skeletal elements other than the skull are very similar and overlap in size, so it is rarely possible to identify them (Tomek and Bochenski 2000). The hooded crow is found in Scotland and the north of England, while the carrion crow and the rook are found further south. From their behaviour (see below) it is likely that the remains discussed here are mostly of crows rather than rooks, and we have mostly referred to crows, but some were originally identied as rooks. There are three other corvids found in Britain, the jackdaw, the magpie and the chough. They are smaller, and their remains are not likely to be confused with those of the larger corvids (Tomek and Bochenski 2000). It is worth bearing in mind that people in the Iron Age are unlikely to have made the conceptual distinctions that we make today with our modern understanding of animal species. It
Figure 1 Raven on a wall in a car park hoping for a titbit. OXFORD JOURNAL OF ARCHAEOLOGY
2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
86
is possible that the rook was subsumed in the category crow in the pre-Linnaean world view, as the two are hard to tell apart except by experts. In the beliefs and myths of the Celtic peoples of Ireland the raven and the crow were viewed as part of a continuum and the myths associated with ravens and crows tell the same stories: for instance, the Mor Regan, the Irish triple-goddess, was sometimes associated with ravens and sometimes with crows (Ross 1974, 313).
the danebury burials

The hillfort at Danebury was excavated in two campaigns, published separately (Cunliffe 1984; Cunliffe and Poole 1991). The archive from the excavations, including both excavated material and paper records, is housed in the Hampshire Museum Service stores in Winchester. This discussion of the Danebury birds is based mainly on remains from the second campaign, which were analysed by Serjeantson (1991), as it has not been possible up to now to locate the bird bones or the data lists of the birds from the rst excavation campaign, which were analysed by Coy (1984). Altogether, between 1 and 2 per cent of all identied bones were from birds (Grant 1984b; Grant et al. 1991, table 61). The numbers do not differ signicantly between occupation phases. Bird bones were recovered from 12 per cent of the pits, but they were found in one-third of the pits in which SADs were identied (Grant et al. 1991, table 6). Out of the approximately 1200 identied bird bones, more than 70 per cent are ravens and 10 per cent crows or rooks (Table 1). Next most frequent are buzzards; two buzzard skeletons were found as well as a few disarticulated bones. Most of the remains of ravens and crows are from 31 skeletons and part-skeletons, but a number of articulated sets of wing bones were found, and also disarticulated bones (Serjeantson 2010). Taphonomy Understanding both the natural destruction and human modications to the skeletal elements is essential for understanding the processes of deposition and subsequent destruction and loss (Serjeantson 1991; Morris 2008a, chapter 12). These changes are summarized here and have been discussed in detail elsewhere (Serjeantson 2010). Three ravens (from P2030, P2183 and P2286) have arthritic changes to some bones, something which is usually associated with old age (Serjeantson 2010, g. 1). Coy also noted signs of age on raven bones. There were traces of carnivore-gnawing on the ravens from P648 (Coy MS notes), P2587 (Serjeantson 2010, g. 3) and post-hole H4101. The possibility was
table 1 Bird bones from Danebury, showing numbers of raven, crow or rook and buzzard bones separately
19691978 Raven Crow or rook Buzzard Other birds Total 533 42 26 118 719 19791988 308 79 11 66 464 Total 841 121 37 184 1183 Per cent 71.1 10.2 3.1 15.6
OXFORD JOURNAL OF ARCHAEOLOGY

87
originally raised that a cat had gnawed on the carcass from P2587 (Serjeantson 1991), but re-examination suggests that the tooth marks are more like those of a polecat or stoat. Since these animals burrow, they could have found the carcass after it had been buried in the ground. Nothing on the skeletons indicates whether or not they were deliberately killed. The wings and feathers were sometimes removed from the bird after death. There were cut marks on wing bones of the raven from P924. In three skeletons the wings were deliberately snapped off, leaving only the proximal end of the humerus (Fig. 2). Three separate articulated wings of ravens were found (in P1978, P2223 and P2578) and one of a crow or rook in P2196 (Serjeantson 2010, table 3). All parts of the body other than the missing wing bones are present in six of the ravens and one of the crows (Table 2). Three of the ravens and two of the crows lack all bones from the head, and two ravens lack any evidence of leg bones. Two of the incomplete skeletons are those which had been attacked by small carnivores, which probably accounts for the loss of some
Figure 2 Removing the wings: humeri of ravens from pits P2609 and P2218 at Danebury with ancient breaks where the wing was snapped off. OXFORD JOURNAL OF ARCHAEOLOGY
88
table 2 Parts of the body present of the raven and crow or rook skeletons from Danebury. R = raven; C/R = crow or rook; ph = proximal humerus only; x = some elements from that part of the body present
Species Context Head Neck Pectoral girdle Wing Trunk Leg R 2030 x x x x x x R 2178 x x ph x x R 2183 x x x x x x R 2218 x x x ph x x R 2286 x x x x x x R 2568 x x x R 2587 x x x x x R 2609 x x x ph x x R 4101 x x x x x C/R 1481 C/R 2223 Crow 2530 x x x x x x
x x x x
x x x x
skeletal elements. In the others the fragile bones of the skull could have fragmented in the ground and the small bones of the leg could have been missed in excavation. In spite of the fact that many skeletons today are incomplete, it is clear that in most cases whole skeletons were originally present at Danebury. There are no traces of butchery and breakage associated with consumption, showing that the corvids were not eaten, something which distinguishes them from nearly all of the other animals in associated bone groups. Context of the burials The fact that the skeletons were whole does not in itself conrm that the birds were deposited in the pits as an intentional act. To establish this we have to look at the context and the associated nds (Table 3). The context is known for all the burials from the second campaign and for four from the rst (pits P723, P921, P924 and P1028) as well as for three of the wings. All but one of the skeletons from the second campaign are from pits, mostly beehive pits; the exception is the raven from H4101. All the skeletons were interpreted as coming from deliberate tip layers, though some may have been recognized as such only after the event. Nearly all (14) were from the base of the pit or from the tip layer immediately above the base, as Cunliffe (1992) observed. The ravens in P921 were disarticulated and spread out close to the base of the pit (Fig. 3); there were at least two and possibly as many as four on the base of this pit as well as another at a higher level. In P2530 the archive record notes resting on the surface of [layer] 7 was a bird skull [of a crow], placed upside down with beak to N.E.. The rest of the skeleton was in layers 5 to 7. The skull or the complete bird had been covered with a pile of stones (Fig. 4). In P2609 a bird burial [a raven] was placed on the pit oor against the pit edge at the SE side of the pit. The wing in P2196 was placed on a platform of int and chalk at the base of the pit. Associated nds The nds associated with the ravens and crows have been taken here to include material in the same context, and also in the layers immediately below and above. Disarticulated animal remains from food or feasting were found with over half the burials. Six were associated with complete or substantially complete skulls of other animals: those of a dog in P1481, an ox in P2030, a pig in P2568, sheep in P2223 and P2530, and both sheep and goat skulls in P2286.
89
table 3 Raven and crow/rook skeletons from Danebury: context and associated nds. R = raven; C/R = crow or rook; (W) = wing bones only; (n) = number of birds in multiple burials
Context type and number Beehive pit P723 Beehive pit P921 Species R (2) R (5) Context description Interface of layer 3, the primary cone, and layer 2, a deliberate tip 1 in upper layer 4 at interface of layer 3, primary silt, and layer 2, a deliberate deposition Layer 7c bird skeleton, disarticulated, spread over an area 0.3 x 0.4m on W side of pit above basal layer 8 on pit base (layer 7) or within layer 6 In layer 11g, one of the basal layers of the pit In layer 4a, a deliberate tip immediately above the primary silt In layer 4c, the basal layer, a deliberate deposit In layer 6, the basal layer, a deliberate tip On a platform of int and chalk at base of pit (layer 6a) In layer 1, a layer in the middle of the pit, a deliberate tip In layer 3, the basal layer, a deliberate tip Layer 5, base of pit, a deliberate tip Layer 5, a deliberate deposit towards the base of the pit: Resting on the surface of 7 [the layer below] was a bird skull, placed upside down with beak to N.E. The rest of the skeleton was assigned to layers 5, 6, 8 and 1 In layer 3, a deliberate tip In layer 5, a deliberate tip, above layer 6, the natural erosion on the base of the pit Layer 5, a deliberate tip in the middle ll of the pit Layer 5, a deliberate deposit on the base of the pit: bird burial placed against the pit edge SE side on the pit oor Associated nds Iron strip, disarticulated bone fragments, 8 potsherds 2 sheep bones in layer 2a, other disarticulated bones in layer 2 1 horse bone, pig bones No other nds in layers 7/6/5. Layer 4 (above) contained a deliberate deposit of three young animals, pig and two calves special deposit in layers 10/11 of ?partial dog skull, large dump of pottery, other disarticulated animal bones Above a human skull and 3 vertebrae in layer 5a. Below a special deposit in layer 3a of large pots, ox skull, other human bones With pot (24 sherds), briquetage, quern, worked bone, sheep (37 including skull frags), other disarticulated animal bone Above a fragment of a human skull (female) and scattered fragments of a male torso in layer 6b. Little occupation material Two dogs, cow leg, sheep bones also on platform Above a human skeleton in layer 2a against the SE wall of the pit, crouched, face to wall. With pottery, other disarticulated animal bone Adjacent to special deposit (layer 3a) of a crouched human skeleton, complete, associated with a sheep skull, other cattle and horse bones. With disarticulated bones of cow, pig and horse Goat skull, sheep skull and mandibles, other bone fragments including sheep Partial sheep skull and disarticulated sheep bones
Beehive pit P924 Beehive pit P1028 Beehive pit P1481 Beehive pit P2030 Beehive pit P2178 Subrectangular pit P2183 Beehive pit P2196 Cylindrical pit P2218 Beehive pit P2223
R R C/R R R R R (W) R C/R R (W) R C
Beehive pit P2286 Beehive pit P2530
Beehive pit P2568 Beehive pit P2578 Beehive pit P2587 Beehive pit P2609
R R (W) R R
Pig skull + 11 pig bones, disarticulated sheep bones, remains of ve pots, slingstone Disarticulated human bones, a large quantity of disarticulated animal bones including 1 of dog and 1 of hare, pottery Bone point, chalk lumps, a few disarticulated animal bones 1 sheep and 1 ox bone
90

Figure 3 Archive drawing of a section through pit P921 at Danebury. Up to four raven skeletons were found on the base of the pit.
Three burials were associated with dog remains: the crow or rook in P1481, the raven in P2196, which was associated with two dog ABGs, and a wing from P2578, which was associated with disarticulated dog remains. Two burials (at least) were associated with signicant pottery, and several were associated with other artefacts including an iron strip, a quern, worked bone and a slingstone. The sling is a weapon which could have been used to kill the birds. Five of the 17 were associated with human remains: there were a skull and disarticulated human bone in P2030, a female skull fragment and a male torso in P2183, a crouched skeleton in P2218 and P2223, and disarticulated human bone in P2578. The strongest association therefore is with animal skulls, but human remains and dogs also feature. The buzzard skeletons were also recovered in pits: P949 and P2598 (Serjeantson 1991).
91
other iron age raven and crow burials

At least 12 further Iron Age sites in England have burials of ravens or crows (Table 4), with many more ravens than crows or rooks. The records compiled here are from published and unpublished sources. The counties of Hampshire, Wiltshire, Dorset and Yorkshire have been comprehensively surveyed (Morris 2008a) as have the Midland counties (Albarella and Pirnie 2009) but we may have missed some examples from elsewhere. The absence of butchery was noted for the skeletons from Owslebury near Winchester (Maltby 1987a), Skeleton Green (Ashdown 1981) and Wittenham Clumps (Allen in prep.). The raven from Winklebury (Smith 1977) had a diseased carpometacarpus (i.e. the end of the wing)
Figure 4 Section through Danebury pit P2530. The location of the skull of a crow noted during excavation is shown; other parts of the skeleton were in the same layer and the layers above. The bird was covered with a pile of stones. Redrawn by Penny Copeland. OXFORD JOURNAL OF ARCHAEOLOGY
92
table 4 Raven and crow or rook skeletons from Iron Age sites in Britain: site type, context and associated nds. Key as Table 3
Site Species Date MIA MIA EIA EIA Site type Hillfort Hillfort Settlement Settlement Context Pit F52/6 Pit F213/8 Beehive pit Q5 Associated nds No published data No published data Abundant nds shown in section; no details in text Ash, no further details
Balksbury R Balksbury R Boscombe Down W R Boscombe Down W R (2) Budbury Cowdown Little Somborne Owslebury Owslebury Owslebury Owslebury Owslebury Rooksdown Silchester Insula IV Skeleton Green Skeleton Green Winklebury Wittenham Clumps R R Rook R (2) C/R R
Beehive pit Q9, platform on base EIA Promontory fort No data IA Hillfort Pit 3rd1st Settlement Pit 84, mid-layer LIA Settlement Gully, F369, L.2 LIA Settlement Ditch, F370, L.3 LIA Settlement Settlement Settlement Settlement Oppidum Oppidum Oppidum Hillfort Hillfort
C/R (2) IA C/R R R R R R R LIA MIA LIA LIA LIA LIA IA
No data No data Burnt int, no other data Articulated horse bones Dog skeleton, pig skeleton, cow skeleton. See also L.5 Ditch, F370, L.5 Sheep/goat skeleton, buzzard, large dumps of bone Quarry F378 with Cat skeleton, chicken skeleton, rapid inll L.1/2 complete pots, large quantity of other animal bone Gully F574, L.4 Pig skeleton, dog skull + other bones Pit 365, basal layer Three horse skulls, puppy, disarticulated dog and disarticulated raven bones Dark earth layer L.2030 Two pieces of human bone, coins, pottery, metalworking and domestic debris Pit F9 G5 L.2 Large quantity of bone and pottery, oyster shell, bronze and iron Pit F9 G5 L.3 objects Base of pit c.2611 Human bones, piglet, ox bones, burnt material Pit 3006 Human, lamb, piglet, high-quality pottery in associated pits
and that from Wittenham Clumps had an injured toe which had healed. Neither of these conditions would have caused the death of the birds. Context The burials are within settlements, hillforts and oppida. As with ABGs generally, nearly all are from pits, with Owslebury for some reason being an exception; there, most were in ditches. The raven skeleton from the oppidum at Silchester was in a layer of dark earth in the centre of the town in deposits which immediately pre-dated its founding (Fulford and Timby 2000; Serjeantson 2000). The ravens from at least three sites, including Boscombe Down (Richardson 1951), Rooksdown (Powell and Clark 1996) and Winklebury, were found on the base of pits, while those from Balksbury were at all levels (Hill 1995). Associated nds Nine of the corvid burials were associated with skulls or part-skeletons of other animals, including four with dogs, three with piglets, and one with a sheep or goat. The raven on the base of a pit at Rooksdown was associated with three horse skulls placed upright on the base and a
93
puppy skeleton (Powell and Clark 1996). Complete or almost complete pots were also found with the burials at Owslebury and Wittenham Clumps. A raven at Owslebury was associated with a buzzard, and a crow or rook with the skeletal remains of a chicken, at the time an unusual bird in Britain. Three, including the Silchester raven, were associated with human skeletal remains. A slingstone was found in the pit at Wittenham Clumps, as at Danebury. At Wittenham Clumps and Skeleton Green the raven was in the richest pit excavated in terms of the artefacts found within. It has been impossible to nd out whether there were signicant associated nds with some burials: this information is not available from the published record of some sites, including Budbury (Westley 1970) and Cowdown, Longbridge Deverill (Harcourt 1968).
corvid burials on roman sites

We have found records of almost 35 examples of corvid skeletons on Roman period sites. Of these, 24 are of ravens (several of which are multiple), seven are of crows or rooks, and four include more than one species (Table 5). At the large settlement at Owslebury both ravens and crows or rooks were found, but at the smaller settlement of Little Somborne it was the smaller corvid, identied as a rook (Neal 1980). None of the skeletons is reported to have butchery marks or other human modications, but a few have pathological changes. The raven from Great Holme Street, Leicester, had had a blow to the shoulder which had healed (T. Gouldwell, pers. comm.); other changes suggest old age. Context The largest number of burials was found in the town of Dorchester, where at least 14 skeletons were identied from seven shafts or pits (Maltby 1993; Woodward and Woodward 2004). At Silchester raven skeletons were found in all of the central insulae (Fox 1891; Ingrem 2006; in prep.). Several were in the extra-mural areas of towns, including those at Alcester (Maltby 2001), Cirencester (R. Nicholson, pers. comm.), Great Holme Street, Leicester, and Winchester (Maltby 1987b). Some were within temples, as at Springhead (Grimm 2007) and Jordan Hill, Dorset (Drew 1932; Green 1992). There were ravens in the ll of three deep shafts, Dunstable (Matthews and Hutchings 1972), Keston (Grimm 2007) and Oakridge (Maltby 1994). Sites with military associations include Longthorpe (Frere and St. Joseph 1974), and the shore fort at Portchester (Cunliffe 1975; Eastham 1975). Sheepen was a garrison at the time when the raven burial took place (Luff 1982; 1995). Two raven burials are from shafts or wells within villa complexes: Keston (Grimm 2007) and Stanion (K. Deighton, pers. comm.). The burials are not restricted to town and shrines, but have also been found on rural settlements such as Buttereld Down (Rawling and Fitzpatrick 1996). Most of the burials were in pits, wells or shafts. These ranged in depth from 3 m to an astonishing 30 m deep at Oakridge. Many of the shafts were originally interpreted as wells which may have been their original function, since the role of these deep structures probably changed over time (Fulford 2001). Some of the shafts were only later recognized as ritual shafts. A small number only were from general layers rather than pits: these include the ravens from Sheepen and Alcester, and one of the ravens from Winchester. Associated nds The associated material (Table 5) includes some elements familiar from the Iron Age, but also additional items such as coins and glass. The association of ravens and crows with 94
table 5 Raven and crow or rook skeletons from Romano-British sites, showing date, site type, context and associated nds. Key as Table 3
Site Alcester Buttereld Down Cirencester Dorchester Greyhound Yard Dorchester Greyhound Yard Dorchester Greyhound Yard Dorchester Greyhound Yard Dorchester Greyhound Yard Dorchester Greyhound Yard Dorchester Greyhound Yard Dunstable Jordan Hill Keston Leicester Great Holme St Longthorpe Oakridge Oakridge Owslebury Owslebury Owslebury Owslebury Owslebury Portchester Species C/R C C R (2) R R (3) C/R R (3) C/R R R R R R C R R R (4) R C C R R C/R R C/R R (2) 2nd3rd C 3rd4th C AD 4462 3rd4th C 3rd4th C 1st C 1st C Late 1st C 4th C 2nd C LRB Villa complex Extra-mural settlement Fortress Well/shaft Well/shaft Settlement Settlement Banjo enclosure Settlement Settlement Shore fort Date 4th C Late Roman RB AD 75120 AD 75120 2nd C AD 150300 AD 150300 L4th L4th RB RB Site type Extra-mural settlement Rural settlement Extra-mural Town centre Town centre Town centre Town centre Town centre Town Town Well/shaft Temple Context Large subrectangular pit or basement Base of deep pit or ditch terminal Pit Rectangular shaft, C.3403 Square shaft C.4161 Square shaft, C.2310 Rectangular shaft, C.1425 Rectangular shaft, C.2164 Pit 1297 Well, C.5145 Shaft 9 m deep Upper ll of shaft or pit, 14 deep Shaft H, base Well No data 78 deep 79 deep Gully F147, L.1/2 Ditch F642, L.1 (base) Ditch of handle, F596, L.2 Cess pit F646, L.3 Quarry F613, L.1 Well (pit) 236 Associated nds Kitten, domestic rubbish (pottery and animal bone) Pottery, animal bone, oyster shell in layer above Dog skeleton 7 dress items, 1 coin Human skull, dog skeleton (17), sheep (1), bowls, jars, samian ware, dress items Dog (13), sheep (7), bowls, jars, coins Dog (20), 7 dress items, 35 counters, 1 coin Dog (11), 4 dress items, 2 counters No data No data Human infant, dogs, white-tailed sea eagle Layered pairs of tiles sandwiching a bird and coins. Also buzzard and starling Buzzard, dog skeleton 2 dogs, cattle heads No data 7 dog skeletons (some burnt), 87 puppies, pig skeletons, sheep heads, calf skulls and feet, chicken skeleton, other burnt and unburnt chicken bones Skeletons of sheep/goat, cat bones, general bone in upper layers Pig skeleton with raven on base of ditch. 3 puppies in L.3, 1 chicken, dog skeletons in L.4 Few other nds 4 dogs/puppies, 2 cat skeletons, buzzard, sheep skulls, 1 horse skull, little general bone Few other bones MN 13 ox skulls, 3 sheep skulls, 2 dog skulls, 1 red deer skull, piglets, lambs, 1 calf, 2 cat skeletons (1 old, 1 immature), shellsh, leather, pottery Skeletons of dog, puppy, white-tailed eagle, 3 complete pots, metal-working materials No details Cattle, sheep, pig, red deer, hare, woodcock Cattle, pig, sheep, red deer antler, hare, rat, chicken Six dog skeletons, calf, pig, chicken, goose No data 3 cattle skeletons Chicken skeletons Intact pots, glass vessel, 8 dog skeletons, 2 cat skeletons, cattle skulls, bullock metapodials, chicken skeleton, white-tailed sea eagle humerus, other animal bones Disarticulated animal bone, many wild species Immature pig skeleton
Colchester Sheepen Silchester Insulae I, II, III Silchester Insula IX Silchester Insula IX Springhead Springhead Stanion Walbrook Winchester NW suburbs
R (2)
Mid 1st C
R (2) R R R (3) R R R (W) R
Roman c.AD 250 c.AD 250 RB RB 2nd C AD 24050 LRB
Extra-mural metalworking area Town Town Town Temple Temple Villa Temple of Mithras Suburb
Pit 120
No data Base of well/shaft 1750 Pit 2601 Base of deep shaft, C.6220, 4.5 m deep Sealing of road to sanctuary Stone-lined well Floor 3 of nave (CB353) Pit 814 (Tr.XIII, Ph.480, C.3262) 3.8 m deep Disused building (Tr.XI, Phase 68) Silting when area fell out of use (Tr.XI, L.74-5)
Winchester NE suburbs Winchester NE suburbs
R R (W)
LRB LRB
Suburb Suburb

95
burials of dogs and puppies emerges more strongly in the Roman period than in the Iron Age: they have been found with at least 15 corvid burials. Altogether 61 dog and puppy ABGs were found in the same group of shafts as the corvids at Dorchester; in shaft 6 all but one of the dog burials were associated with ravens (Woodward and Woodward 2004, g. 3). Seven adult dogs and no less than 87 puppy ABGs were found in the Oakridge shaft and eight dogs of various types, size and age were found in the extra-mural pit at Winchester. Skeletons of cats were associated with at least ve corvid burials. These are likely to be domestic cats, which became common in Roman times. Chickens were found with three of the burials, some as disarticulated remains and some as whole birds. Three cattle skeletons were found in the well at Stanion Villa. Pig and piglet ABGs were associated with several of the corvids, and skulls of sheep and cattle were found in the Oakridge well. The other birds associated with the corvid burials are again buzzards and also the white-tailed sea eagle. These raptors, like ravens and crows, sometimes scavenge around human settlements. Several Dorchester shafts contained pottery vessels and jars which had originally been complete (Woodward and Woodward 2004, pl. 1). They also contained coins, counters and dress items. The skeleton outside the town of Colchester was also associated with a complete pot (Luff 1982), and a glass vessel was present in the ll of the Winchester pit (Maltby 2010). Two shafts only with raven burials also had human remains: in shaft 6 in Dorchester the raven was in the same layer as a human skull and at Dunstable an infant was buried in the same shaft as the raven.
corvid deposits beyond southern britain

A small number of corvid skeletons from Continental Europe have similarities to those discussed here. In Italy, a crow burial was excavated from a shaft of the Etruscan period in Altino; it, too, was accompanied by several dogs (Fiore and Tagliacozzo 2001). At Late Iron Age Manching in Bavaria, which was excavated on a similar scale to Danebury, only one raven skeleton was recognized, but the remains of at least six more were present (Boessneck et al. 1971). The ll of a cistern or shaft of the Hellenistic (Roman) period at the Sanctuary of Poseidon at Kalaureia on the Greek island of Poros contained a crow, together with eight adult dogs, several young puppies and unusually several snakes. The cistern also contained a large quantity of eggshell, murex shells, remains of food animals and glass vessels (Mylona et al. in press). At Voorburg (Forum Hadriani) in the Netherlands, a raven, originally complete, was found in a pit or well with a quantity of other animal bones (Zeiler and Vries 2008), and remains have been recovered from the Mithraeum at Weissloch in Germany (King 2005).
changing interpretations
Since archaeologists rst found raven bones on Roman sites, ideas on how to interpret them have changed (Table 6). Some authors have seen the remains as accidental inclusions of birds which lived commensally with people or even as pets, while others have seen them as birds deliberately killed for food or as undesirable scavengers around the settlement. Many discussed possible interpretations without coming to a conclusion these are shown as either/or in Table 6 and some did not comment on the origin of the skeleton. The interpretations have tended to change over time (Morris 2008a). Functional explanations have usually been offered by zooarchaeologists who, trained in rational and scientic disciplines, sought natural reasons for the presence of the corvid. The ritual explanations are offered by those familiar with the religious beliefs and practices of the 96
table 6 Summary of interpretations of corvid burials showing how interpretations have changed over time
Authors interpretation No comment Killed for food Tame bird Scavenger Killed for feathers Either/Or Ritual 1890s 1950s 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 3 1 2 2 1 2 1 6 1960s 1 1970s 2 1980s 4 1990s 2000s 1
Iron Age and Roman period. Ross (1974) looked at deposits in pits, shafts and wells from Iron Age and Roman Britain, advocating that they should be examined in the light of Celtic practice as evidenced in iconography and literature. She observed that there were many strange deposits in the pits, shafts and wells, including dogs and the heads of ravens as well as other objects such as vessels and swords. She regarded the animals as sacriced for prognostication and other ritual purposes, which were regular components of Celtic religion (Ross 1974, 275). Among zooarchaeologists, little note was taken of the implications of Rosss conclusions for several years, but research by Aldhouse-Green (Green 1992; Aldhouse-Green 2001; Aldhouse-Green and Aldhouse-Green 2005) and J.D. Hill (1995) has since led to greater understanding of the role of animals in Iron Age rituals among archaeologists, if not among zooarchaeologists. At Danebury itself, Coy was reluctant to accept that the corvids were deliberate burials with ritual signicance. Unpublished archive notes document their associations with small mammals such as rodents and rabbits, which suggests that she was working on the hypothesis that the corvids were also accidentally incorporated in the pits. However, Grant and Cunliffe reached the conclusion that the birds were a component of the special animal deposits. In some cases interpretations have changed as more data have become available. Maltby (1993) originally regarded the raven and crow skeletons from Greyhound Yard as natural deaths or of unknown origin but subsequently Woodward and Woodward (2004), who looked at the location of the shafts and the contents as a whole, showed that they were deliberate offerings, probably foundation or dedicatory sacrices. This led Maltby to reconsider his original views (Maltby in press). The raven skeleton in Insula IX at Silchester was initially seen as a natural casualty (Ingrem 2006), but, after learning that the associated material included dog skeletons and horses, Ingrem recognized that the burial was more likely to be an offering or ritual deposit of some kind (Ingrem in prep.). In his original report on the bone remains from the suburbs of Winchester, Maltby considered that the raven skeleton from pit F814 could have been part of a purge of scavenging animals, but later modied his views to suggest that this pit is the most likely candidate to meet the criteria of a special deposit as dened by Grant (Maltby 2010). Functional reasons for corvid burials The implication of the above analysis is that nearly all of the ravens and crows discussed here were deliberate burials, although there is room for doubt with a minority. Some of the possible functional explanations for the presence of corvids in deposits have already been referred to and we shall examine this possibility rst.
97
Natural deaths: Some authors regarded the skeletons as accidental casualties of commensal birds. Coy (1984) observed Ravens frequent rubbish dumps and may pick at carcasses so that the high frequency of raven nds on Iron Age settlements in Wessex is not surprising. The most powerful reason for rejecting natural death as the origin for most of the corvids is that the skeletons discussed here were not disarticulated or gnawed by dogs, as is the case with animal remains which lie unburied for any length of time. Remains of ravens, crows and other scavenging birds such as red kites are occasionally found on medieval sites, but they are rare, and, more signicantly, are disarticulated. These are likely to be remains of scavenging birds (Mulkeen and OConnor 1997). Killed because scavengers of carrion: The raven has evolved to feed mainly on carrion (Ratcliffe 1997, 9) and the crow is also a scavenger of carrion and other food scraps. This habit of feeding on carrion has led ravens and crows to live around human settlements from very early times. There were particular conditions which must have encouraged ravens and crows to live close to human settlement in the rst millennium BC. From that time onwards there appears to have been intensication of the animal husbandry, one aspect of which was that calving and lambing took place within the settlement (Serjeantson 2007). Casualties of young animals and placentas would have provided carrion, especially at calving and lambing time. There is a debate which continues among farmers as to whether ravens and crows merely scavenge the carcasses of calves and lambs which die naturally, or whether they also kill them. It seems likely that the birds sometimes hasten the death of a weak young lamb, but that they do not kill healthy animals (Wilmore 1977). Ravens are known to have acted as scavengers which cleaned up the towns in the Roman period and, with red kites, were encouraged in medieval towns for the same role (Ratcliffe 1997, 14). Coy suggested that the corvids at Danebury were killed because they scavenged carcasses and Maltby originally thought it likely that the corvids at Danebury and in the Oakridge well were killed for the same reason. A raven skeleton at Owslebury is described as dumped on the base of the ditch (Maltby 1987a). With some of the skeletons discussed, there is room for doubt as to whether the birds were deliberately buried, but the context and associated material (or lack of it) do suggest that some were casualties or killed as scavengers. These include the part-skeleton found in the large pit at Alcester, and those in the ditch of the banjo enclosure and in the quarry at Owslebury. The raven from the north-eastern suburbs of Winchester which was found in a silt layer and with no distinctive associated material was plausibly interpreted as a scavenger which died or was killed (Maltby 2010). The raven from the Silchester oppidum is more ambiguous. Though in a layer, it was associated with very rich occupation debris and also disarticulated human remains (Fulford and Timby 2000). This may well have been a deliberate burial. Killed for food: In the discussion of the nds from Boscombe Down West, Richardson (1951) suggested that the bones of the three ravens were perhaps the remains of raven stew. As discussed, this explanation was rejected for the Danebury corvids, and is equally unlikely for the other sites discussed here. Ravens and crows are among those few animals which were consistently avoided as food. In the Celtic world, according to Ross (1974, 329), the esh of the raven seems to have been regarded as deadly. This is partly because humans tend to avoid eating other animals which eat carrion but it must also be because of the association of ravens and crows with evil omen and death, as discussed later. Killed for feathers: Were the ravens and crows killed for their glossy black wing feathers, as suggested by Serjeantson (1991) and Hill (1995)? As we have seen, the wings were 98
removed from three of the Danebury corvids and sets of wing bones were found. Feathers were worn in the Roman period, especially by the army (Parker 1988). A warriors helmet of the secondthird century AD from Ciumesti in Romania is mounted with a metal raven with moving wings which would have apped as the warrior ran (Green 1992, 88). This suggests that some helmets were surmounted with actual feathers. Raven wings were part of the regalia of Mithraism, a religion which was briey popular in the later Empire, and a wing bone of a raven was in fact found in the temple of Mithras at Walbrook (Macready and Sidell 1998). Feather use no doubt accounts for the disarticulated sets of wing bones as well as for those part-skeletons lacking the distal wing. Of the possible functional reasons for killing the birds, the most convincing is the desire for feathers or feathered wings, though it does not explain why the birds were then carefully deposited in pits.
ritual reasons why ravens and crows?

If, as we have argued, the deposition of ravens and crows in pits was deliberate at Danebury and at all or nearly all of the other sites discussed here, it is important to consider what the ritual purpose might be. Ritual is a category which can include many different actions and means so only provides a very general explanation (Morris 2008a). The reasons for interpreting the burials as purposeful ritual acts are based on many aspects of the relationship between humans and ravens and crows. These included on the one hand a fear and distrust of the birds and on the other hand a closeness which went beyond commensalism. Ravens and crows are often viewed as close to people (Ratcliffe 1997, 10). Ravens are the most intelligent of the birds, and both crows and ravens are sociable and adaptable. Ravens can count (Wilmore 1977, 148) and are capable of deliberate deception, a character once thought to be found only in humans and primates (Bugnyar and Kotrschal 2004). Most signicantly, both ravens and crows can learn to understand limited human speech and their calls seem similar to human speech. They can even learn to talk (Wilmore 1977, 148). Ravens live to 20 to 25 years; one tame bird at the Tower of London even lived to 44 years (Ratcliffe 1997, 214). Peoples attitudes to ravens and crows were linked with beliefs about the spirit world and the gods. Both feature in myths worldwide. We know something of the beliefs associated with ravens and crows in the Roman world from the Classical writers and this is complemented by the other rich source for beliefs and ritual practice in Europe, which is found in the early Celtic literature (Ross 1974; Green 1992, 17781; Aldhouse-Green and Aldhouse-Green 2005). Communication and prophecy Raven calls were often interpreted as messages carried from the Otherworld to the human world (Green 1992, 17781). The fact that ravens and to a lesser degree crows can talk led to their being assigned the power of prophecy in many societies, especially prophecies of doom. Apollo is said to have listened to the prophetic utterances of a raven. A bronze container in the National Etruscan Museum in Rome depicts a raven standing on the oracle stone as Apollo consults the oracle at Delphi. In the beliefs of the rst millennium BC and indeed later, ravens were thought to have the ability to foretell the outcome of battles. The Celtic raven-god Lugh, the god of war, was warned by his raven familiars of the approach of his enemies. In many societies the ight patterns as well as the calls of ravens were believed to predict future events (Henig 1996; Aldhouse-Green 2004, 187).
99
Shape-shifting Iron Age society, like many pre-Modern societies, will have seen humans and animals as a continuum, rather than as a duality, with some individuals seen as having the ability to manipulate themselves into either human or animal form, and vice versa (Mullin 1999). Ravens and crows are among those animals which are most often involved in shape-shifting. The god Lugh could change at will into a raven, as could Badbh or the Mor Regan, the evil triple-goddess or harridan of ancient Irish belief, who prophesied the outcome of battles. The Mor Regan, who took many forms, could change at will into a raven, squawking terrible omens and terrifying armies by their presence . . . sometimes these women appear as old hags hunched in black rags and so take on the semi-guise of carrion birds (Green 1992, 879; Aldhouse-Green 2004, 54). When three ravens appeared at the Samhain festival and carried off three boy-children, the hero Caoilte killed all three; they turned out to be the Mor Regan (Ross 1974, 328; Green 1992, 17781). Companion animals and familiars Ravens and crows have been tamed and kept as pets or companion animals, having less fear of humans than other birds do because of their long history of commensalism. Pliny and Macrobius among the Classical authors refer to the keeping of ravens as pets in ancient Rome (Toynbee 1973) and the practice continues today with the tame ravens at the Tower of London. The Roman tradition of keeping ravens as pets led some authors to suggest that the ravens found during the late nineteenth century excavations at Silchester were pets or even semidomesticated (Fox 1891). Today tamed birds are regarded as pets or companion animals, but when they are tamed for ritual purposes they are familiars rather than pets. In many ancient cultures the gods are said to have kept a raven or a pair of ravens as familiars. This is reported of Mithras as well as of Apollo, Lugh and the Mor Regan. The two raven familiars of the Norse god Odin represented thought and memory. They acted as his messengers, ying out each morning, and returning each evening to tell their master of all the events which had taken place that day. The druids or shamans of the Celtic world and their successors the priests of the Roman world may have kept ravens as familiars. Some images of the period show ravens associating with people. A Gallo-Roman stone relief from Moux, France, shows a man with birds perched on his shoulders; possibly a shaman with his animal helpers (Fig. 5). These have been interpreted as ravens or possibly woodpeckers, but from their relative size, shape and attitude the birds appear to be a pair of ravens. The other animal helper is a dog and, as discussed, dogs are frequently associated with ravens in burials. There is a pair of ravens on the Dunaverney esh-hook, which may be intended as a pair of prophetic birds. A copper alloy gurine of a bird on an iron mount found at Buttereld Down is thought to be the terminal of a priestly wand (Henig 1996). The shape is not clear and Henig thought the bird might be an eagle, but its beak is more like that of a corvid, so it may well have been intended as a raven. A bronze strip from a priests sceptre from Farley Mount shows a raven and also a dog (Ross 1974, 425), and goddesses are depicted with ravens in Continental Europe (e.g. Ross 1974, gs. 151 and 152). These examples reinforce a connection between ravens and the priestly class. If some of the ravens and crows deposited in the pits had been companion animals or familiars to the druids or priests, it could account for the fact that some of the skeletons were of long-lived birds. 100
Figure 5 Stone relief of the Gallo-Roman period from Moux, France, showing a man with birds perched on each of his shoulders and a dog at his feet. The man is probably a priest or druid and the birds have the appearance and attitude of ravens. Reproduced with permission from Aldhouse-Green (2001, g. 74).
Avian scavengers and excarnation The predominant burial rite in Iron Age southern Britain was excarnation followed by secondary burial (Wait 1985; Craig et al. 2005; Redfern 2008). The druid or priest will have ofciated in this rite in which the body was exposed after death, sometimes having been dismembered or partly dismembered (Redfern 2008). The place of exposure is thought to have been a platform on a four-post structure or a tree, a location in which the corpse would be accessible to ravens, crows and other scavenging birds. The process of exposure is thought to have extended as long as a year, and after that time parts of the skeleton, usually the skull and the long bones, were collected and curated or buried within the settlement or hillfort. The disarticulation, breakage and erosion of the human skeletal elements have conrmed that excarnation took place at Danebury itself, Maiden Castle, Gussage All Saints and some other sites. Carnivores were probably not a usual part of the excarnation process. The traces of
101
carnivore-gnawing are easily recognized and though occasionally seen are very rare on human bones (Redfern 2008). Both ravens and crows are notorious for scavenging human as well as animal corpses if the body is left unburied, especially after battle. This is attested in folklore and in such works as the Anglo-Saxon poem Judith, where the raven is referred to as the corpse greedy bird, the black coated raven. An image on an Etruscan pot shows a warrior with a raven pecking at his eye (Green 1992, 89). This habit must be one reason for the fear and respect in which ravens were held. As we have seen, the other scavenging birds of Britain, the buzzard and the white-tailed sea eagle, also occasionally received special treatment. Where excarnation is practised today in India and Tibet the main avian scavengers which do the work of excarnation are vultures, but crows, kites and buzzards play a minor role. In Tibet the dead are carried to a hilltop and the waiting vultures are called to the site to begin their work (Peters and Schmidt 2004). If ravens and crows played a similar role among those Iron Age communities in Britain which practised excarnation, the druids may even have called them, providing another context in which they could have become commensal or tame. It is also a role which might readily have led to ravens and crows being appropriate for certain sacrices. Ravens and crows as propitiatory offerings The beliefs and relationships discussed above do not necessarily lead to the burial of physical remains, but there were many reasons for burying animals and parts of animals in signicant places in the past. Some can be ruled out. Ravens and crows do not feature as offerings in graves, no doubt because they were food for neither the dead nor for the gods they were going to meet in the afterlife (Serjeantson 2009, 3408). The raven has been a powerful totemic bird in many cultures (Driver 1999) and, according to Celtic literature, people assigned totemic roles to animals, including the raven. However, it is not usual for people to kill their totem animal; on the contrary, killing the totem animal was normally avoided (Oberg 1980, 45). The explanation that is most widely accepted for why people in the Iron Age and Roman period deposited bones and other material in pits is that they were part of a ritual intended to propitiate the gods and to ensure fertility and reproduction. Cunliffe (1992) proposed that the deposits at Danebury were offerings to Demeter, since the primary use of many of the pits was to store seed corn. The ravens and crows in this context would not have been offerings of the rst fruits, as the other animals might have been, as they were not food. Nevertheless, they are likely to have been offerings to the gods of the underworld, deposited to ensure a favourable outcome to some future event or to avert a bad outcome. Ravens may have been associated with pits and wells because of a perceived chthonic symbolism: ritual shafts penetrate deep underground, forming a line of communication between the living and the dead, the earth and the underworld powers (Green 1992, 88). Their power of communication between humans and the gods was to continue after their death.
discussion
The interpretation of the deposits discussed here has been a matter of much debate within the archaeological community, which has centred on the dichotomy between ritual and functional interpretations of past behaviour. We have shown how, if we are to understand the intentions of those who made the deposits, it is essential to understand the sequence of actions 102
which created them. We have called on zoological and taphonomic knowledge as well as contextual information. By taking these data together with written sources and iconography, we have been able to offer some possible explanations for the corvid burials. By demonstrating the history of the individual skeletons, we have been able in many cases to conrm their deliberate nature, with the key factors being their context within a pit or shaft and their degree of completeness. We have also shown how the wings and feathers of ravens and crows were removed, no doubt for use as decoration or as military or ritual regalia. The material with which the burials are associated includes other animals and signicant artefacts such as whole pots and glass. In the Iron Age some raven and crow burials are associated with human remains, and in the Roman period many are associated with dogs, including puppies. Indeed, it is clear that ritual burials of puppies and adult dogs are encountered more often than those of ravens and crows (Morris 2008a), and they would certainly merit a study in their own right. This paper has reafrmed the importance of ravens and crows in ritual action in the Iron Age and Roman period. The burials are one of the elements of the continuity in religious practice in evidence between the rst millennium BC and the rst millennium AD (Fulford 2001). The practice of corvid burial was widespread; though most of the examples we have cited are from Britain, it also took place across Europe. Similar ritual or votive deposits have now been identied on some Anglo-Saxon sites; the deposits include dogs and also horses though none noted up to now includes corvids (Hamerow 2006). In view of the importance of the raven in the Anglo-Saxon and Nordic religions, it would not be surprising if further raven burials were to be found in the future. The character and behaviour of ravens and crows gave them signicance in later prehistoric and Classical times. Both species lived alongside human settlements as scavengers, which must have given them a role in the Iron Age as agents in the rite of excarnation. The tolerance of ravens and crows to living close to human settlement may well have led to their being tamed or at least to their associating as familiars with individuals such as druids and priests. Their voice and calls led to the belief that they communicated with the gods, which must have contributed to the belief that certain of the gods and goddesses were shape-shifters who could transform themselves sometimes into human form and sometimes into the form of ravens and crows. Both were assigned powers of prophecy, which derived on occasion from their ight which they have in common with all birds but especially from their calls. All or any of these might have been the impulse which led to the notion that for certain rituals it was desirable that a raven or crow was deposited within a pit or shaft.
conclusion
Zooarchaeologists up to now have drawn attention to reasons why the excavated ravens and crows might have become buried accidentally rather than deliberately, while archaeologists have been readier to accept the ritual signicance of the corvids (Morris in press). This is partly because zooarchaeologists by training are more likely rst to seek biological, economic or indeed rational explanations for behaviour. But it is also because, unlike the archaeologist who has the opportunity to see the whole picture, zooarchaeologists have all too often worked in ignorance of the archaeological context of the material they study. This has two implications. The interpretations arrived at here required that all classes of material were considered together. Feedback between the excavator and those reporting on the different materials is necessary,
103
something which is frequently a casualty of commercial excavations today. Excavators, for their part, need to be sensitive to the possible presence of the bones of these birds in the lower levels of pits, especially of any pits which otherwise seem to include deliberate deposits. Zooarchaeologists need to be more open to the social importance of the animals they study, especially in pre-Christian societies where animals were closely linked with spiritual and social life and indeed were not necessarily viewed as separate and alien beings from the humans with whom they came into contact.
Acknowledgements
We would like to thank many people for their help. Kay Ainsworth and Alan Jacobs gave access to the Danebury archive, which is currently being assembled and catalogued at the Hampshire Museum Stores. Miranda Aldhouse-Green kindly provided a photograph of the Moux engraving and allowed us to reproduce it, and Barry Cunliffe gave permission to reproduce the Danebury pit sections. Geraldine Parsons was helpful on the subject of the Celtic gods and the Mor Regan. Many people allowed us to refer to data which have not yet been published, including Umberto Albarella, Tim Allen, Rebekah Davis, Karen Deighton, Lisette de Vries, Tony Gouldwell, Jessica Grimm, Clare Ingrem, Mark Maltby, Rebecca Nicholson, Tessa Pirnie, Adrienne Powell and Jorn Zeiler.
(DS) Archaeology School of Humanities University of Southampton Higheld Southampton SO17 1BJ (JM) Museum of London Archaeology Mortimer Wheeler House 46 Eagle Wharf Road London N1 7ED
references
albarella, u. and pirnie, t. 2009: A review of animal bone evidence from Central England (http:// ads.ahds.ac.uk/catalogue/archive/animalbone_eh_2007/query.cfm?) aldhouse-green, m.j. 2001: Dying for the Gods: Human Sacrice in Iron Age and Roman Europe (Stroud). aldhouse-green, m.j. 2004: An Archaeology of Images (London). aldhouse-green, m.j. and aldhouse-green, s. 2005: The Quest for the Shaman (London). allen, t. in prep.: Excavations at Wittenham Clumps (Oxford, Oxford Archaeology). ashdown, r. 1981: Avian bones. In Partridge, C. (ed.), Skeleton Green: a Late Iron Age and RomanoBritish Site (London, Britannia Monogr. 2), 23541. boessneck, j., von den driesch, a., meyer-lemppenau, u. and wechsler-von ohlen, e. 1971: Die Ausgrabungen in Manching VI. Die Tierknochenfunde aus dem Oppidum von Manching (Wiesbaden). bugnyar, t. and kotrschal, k. 2004: Leading a conspecic away from food in ravens (Corvus corax)? Journal of Animal Cognition 7(2), 6976. coy, j. 1984: The bird bones. In Cunliffe, B., Danebury: an Iron Age Hillfort in Hampshire. Vol. 2 The Excavations 19691978: the Finds (London, CBA Res. Rep. 52), 52731. craig, r.c., knsel, c.j. and carr, g.c. 2005: Fragmentation, mutilation and dismemberment: an interpretation of human remains on Iron Age sites. In Parker Pearson, M. and Thorpe, I.J.N. (eds.), Warfare, Violence and Slavery in Prehistory (Oxford, BAR Int. Ser. 1374), 6580. cunliffe, b. 1975: Excavations at Portchester Castle. Vol. 1 Roman (London, Res. Rep. Soc. Antiq. XXXII).
104
cunliffe, b. 1984: Danebury: an Iron Age Hillfort in Hampshire. Vol. 1 The Excavations 19691978: the Site (London, CBA Res. Rep. 52). cunliffe, b. 1992: Pits, preconceptions and propitiation in the British Iron Age. Oxford Journal of Archaeology 11(1), 6983. cunliffe, b. and poole, c. 1991: Danebury: an Iron Age Hillfort in Hampshire. Vol. 4 The Excavations 19791988: the Site (London, CBA Res. Rep. 73). drew, c.d. 1932: The excavations at Jordan Hill, 1931. Dorset Natural History and Archaeology Society Transactions 53, 26573. driver, j. 1999: Raven skeletons from Palaeoindian contexts, Charlie Lake Cave, British Columbia. American Antiquity 64(2), 28998. eastham, a. 1975: The bird bones. In Cunliffe, B., Excavations at Portchester Castle. Vol. 1 Roman (London, Res. Rep. Soc. Antiq. XXXII), 40915. fiore, i. and tagliacozzo, a. 2001: I resti ossei animali dal santuario preromano in localit Fornace di Altino (VE). In del Sacro, G. (ed.), Culti e Santuari antichi in Altino e nel Veneto orientale (Altinum, Studi e ricerche sulla Gallia Cisalpina 14, Studi di archeologia, epigraa e storia 2), 8796. fox, g.e. 1891: Excavations on the site of the Roman city at Silchester, Hants, in 1891; with a note on the animal remains found during the excavations by Herbert Jones, Esq. Archaeologia 53, 26388. frere, s.s. and st. joseph, j.k. 1974: The Roman fortress at Longthorpe. Britannia 5, 1129. fulford, m. 2001: Links with the past: pervasive ritual behaviour in Roman Britain. Britannia 32, 199318. fulford, m. and timby, j. (eds.) 2000: Late Iron Age and Roman Silchester: Excavations on the Site of the Forum Basilica 1977, 198086 (London, Britannia Monogr. 15). grant, a. 1984a: Ritual behaviour. In Cunliffe, B., Danebury: an Iron Age Hillfort in Hampshire. Vol. 2 The Excavations 19691978: the Finds (London, CBA Res. Rep. 52), 53363. grant, a. 1984b: Animal husbandry. In Cunliffe, B., Danebury: an Iron Age Hillfort in Hampshire. Vol. 2 The Excavations 19691978: the Finds (London, CBA Res. Rep. 52), 496548. grant, a., rush, c. and serjeantson, d. 1991: Animal husbandry. In Cunliffe, B. and Poole, C., Danebury: an Iron Age Hillfort in Hampshire. Vol. 5 The Excavations 19791988: the Finds (London, CBA Res. Rep. 73), 44787. green, m.j. 1992: Animals in Celtic Life and Myth (London). grimm, j. 2007: A dogs life: animal bone from a Romano-British ritual shaft at Springhead, Kent (UK). Beitrge zur Archozoologie und Prhistorischen Anthropologie, Band VI (Langenweibach), 54 75. hamerow, h. 2006: Special deposits in Anglo-Saxon settlements. Medieval Archaeology 30, 130. harcourt, r. 1968: Animal Remains from Cowdown, Longbridge Deverill (London, English Heritage, AML Rep. 1626). henig, m. 1996: Sceptre head. In Rawling, M. and Fitzpatrick, A.P., Prehistoric and Romano-British settlement at Buttereld Down, Amesbury. Wiltshire Archaeology and Natural History Magazine 89, 356. hill, j.d. 1995: Ritual to Rubbish in the Iron Age of Wessex: a Study on the Formation of a Specic Archaeological Record (Oxford, BAR Brit. Ser. 242). hill, j.d. 1996: The identication of ritual deposits of animal bones. A general perspective from a specic study of special animal deposits from the southern English Iron Age. In Anderson, S. and Boyle, K. (eds.), Ritual Treatment of Human and Animal Remains. Proceedings of the First Meeting of the Osteoarchaeological Research Group (Oxford), 1732. ingrem, c.y. 2006: The animal bone. In Fulford, M., Clarke, A. and Eckardt, H. (eds.), Life and Labour in Late Roman Silchester. Excavations in Insula IX since 1997 (London, Britannia Monogr. 22), 16788. ingrem, c.y. in prep.: The animal bone from Early and Mid-Roman deposits. In Fulford, M. (ed.), City in Transition: Silchester Insula IX. king, a. 2005: Animal remains from temples in Roman Britain. Britannia 36, 32969. luff, r.m. 1982: A Zooarchaeological Study of the Roman North-western Provinces (Oxford, BAR Int. Ser. 137). luff, r. 1995: The fauna. In Niblett, R. (ed.), Sheepen: an Early Roman Industrial Site at Camulodunum (London, CBA Res. Rep. 57), 1439.
105
macready, s. and sidell, j. 1998: Animal remains. In Shepherd, J.D. (ed.), The Temple of Mithras, London. Excavations by W.F. Grimes and A. Williams at the Walbrook (London, English Heritage Archaeol. Rep. 12), 20815. maltby, m. 1987a: The Animal Bones from the Excavations at Owslebury, Hants. An Iron Age and Early Romano-British Settlement (London, English Heritage, AML Rep. 6/87). maltby, m. 1987b: The Animal Remains from the Later Roman Phases from Winchester Northern Suburbs. 1: The Unsieved Samples from Victoria Road Trenches XXVI (London, English Heritage, AML Rep. 125/87). maltby, m. 1993: Animal bones. In Woodward, P.J., Davies, S.M. and Graham, A.H. (eds.), Excavations at the Old Methodist Chapel and Greyhound Yard, Dorchester (Dorchester, Dorset Natural History and Archaeological Society), 315 40. maltby, m. 1994: The animal bones from a Romano-British well at Oakridge II, Basingstoke. Proceedings of the Hampshire Field Club and Archaeological Society 49, 4776. maltby, m. 2001: Faunal remains (AES 76-7). In Booth, P. and Ewans, J. (eds.), Roman Alcester: Northern Extra-mural Area 19691988 Excavations (London, CBA Res. Rep. 127), 26590. maltby, m. 2010: Feeding a Roman Town. Winchester Excavations, Vol. 4 (Winchester, Winchester Museums). maltby, m. in press: Zooarchaeology and the interpretation of deposition in shafts. In Morris, J. and Maltby, M. (eds.), Integrating Social and Environmental Archaeologies; Reconsidering Deposition (Oxford, BAR Brit. Ser.). matthews, c.l. and hutchings, j.b. 1972: A Roman well at Dunstable in Bedfordshire. Archaeological Journal 7, 2134. morris, j. 2008a: Re-examining Associated Bone Groups from Southern England and Yorkshire, c.4000BC to AD1550 (Ph.D. Thesis, Bournemouth University). morris, j. 2008b: Associated bone groups; one archaeologists rubbish is anothers ritual deposition. In Davis, O., Waddington, K. and Sharples, N. (eds.), Changing Perspectives on the First Millennium BC (Oxford), 8398. morris, j. in press: The composition and interpretation of associated bone groups from Wessex. In Campana, D., Choyke, A., Crabtree, P., Defrance, S. and Lev-Tov, J. (eds.), Anthropological Approaches to Zooarchaeology: Colonialism, Complexity and Animal Transformations (Oxford). mulkeen, s. and oconnor, t.p. 1997: Raptors in towns: towards an ecological model. International Journal of Osteoarchaeology 7(4), 4409. mullin, m.h. 1999: Mirrors and windows: socio-cultural studies of human-animal relationships. Annual Review of Anthropology 28, 20124. mylona, d., nitinou, m., pakkanen, p., penttinen, a., serjeantson, d. and theodoropoulou, t. in press: Integrating archaeology and science in a Greek sanctuary: issues of practise and interpretation in the study of the bioarchaeological remains from the sanctuary of Poseidon at Kalaureia. In Voutsaki, S. and Valamoti, S. (eds.), Subsistence, Economy and Society in the Greek World: Improving the Integration of Archaeology and Science (Louvain). neal, d. 1980: Bronze Age, Iron Age and Roman settlement sites at Little Somborne and Ashley, Hants. Proceedings of the Hampshire Field Club and Archaeological Society 36, 91143. oberg, k. 1980: The Social Economy of the Tlingit Indian (Vancouver). parker, a.j. 1988: The birds of Roman Britain. Oxford Journal of Archaeology 7(2), 197226. peters, j. and schmidt, k. 2004: Animals in the symbolic world of Pre-Pottery Neolithic Gbekli Tepe, south-eastern Turkey: a preliminary assessment. Anthropozoologica 39(1), 179218. powell, a. and clark, k.m. 1996: Exploitation of Domestic Animals in the Iron Age at Rooksdown (University of Southampton, unpublished report for Wessex Archaeology). ratcliffe, d. 1997: The Raven (London). rawling, m. and fitzpatrick, a.p. 1996: Prehistoric and Romano-British settlement at Buttereld Down, Amesbury. Wiltshire Archaeology and Natural History Magazine 89, 143. redfern, r. 2008: New evidence for Iron Age secondary burial practice and bone modication from Gussage All Saints and Maiden Castle (Dorset, England). Oxford Journal of Archaeology 27(3), 281301. richardson, k.m. 1951: The excavation of Iron Age villages on Boscombe Down West. Wiltshire Archaeological and Natural History Magazine 54, 12368.
106
ross, a. 1974: Pagan Celtic Britain (London). serjeantson, d. 1991: The bird bones. In Cunliffe, B. and Poole, C., Danebury: an Iron Age Hillfort in Hampshire. Vol. 5 The Excavations 19791988: the Finds (London, CBA Res. Rep. 73), 47981. serjeantson, D. 2000: Bird bones. In Fulford, M. and Timby, J. (eds.), Late Iron Age and Roman Silchester: Excavations on the Site of the Forum Basilica 1977, 198086 (London, Britannia Monogr. 15), 484500. serjeantson, d. 2007: Intensication of animal husbandry in the Late Bronze Age? The contribution of sheep and pigs. In Haselgrove, C. and Pope, R. (eds.), The Earlier Iron Age in Britain and the Near Continent (Oxford), 8093. serjeantson, d. 2009: Birds (Cambridge, Cambridge Manuals in Archaeology). serjeantson, d. 2010: Ravens and crows in Iron Age Britain: the Danebury corvids. In Prummel, W., Zeiler, J. and Brinkhuisen, D. (eds.), Proceedings of the 6th Bird Working Group Meeting, Groningen 2008 (Groningen, Groningen Archaeological Studies), 17585. smith, k. 1977: The excavation of Winklebury Camp, Basingstoke, Hampshire. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 43, 5869. tomek, t. and bochenski, z. 2000: The Comparative Osteology of European Corvids (Aves: Corvidae), with a Key to the Identication of their Skeletal Elements (Krakow, Institute of Systematics and Evolution of Animals). toynbee, j.m.c. 1973: Animals in Roman Life and Art (London). wait, g.a. 1985: Ritual and Religion in Iron Age Britain (Oxford, BAR Brit. Ser. 149). westley, b. 1970: The animal bones. In Wainwright, G.J., An Iron Age promontory fort at Budbury, Bradford-on-Avon, Wiltshire. Wiltshire Archaeological and Natural History Magazine 65B, 1524. wilmore, s.b. 1977: Crows, Jays, Ravens and their Relatives (Newton Abbot). woodward, p. and woodward, a. 2004: Dedicating the town: urban foundation deposits in Roman Britain. World Archaeology 36, 6886. zeiler, j.t. and vries, l.s. 2008: De raaf in de waterput. Archeozologisch onderzoek van de Romeinse stad Forum Hadriani (120270 AD), gem. Leidschendam-Voorburg (LVB-FO 9888) (Leeuwarden, ArchaeoBone rapport nr. 65).

107

Ravens and Crows in Iron Age and Roman Britain

Încărcat de

Informații document

Descriere originală:

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Ravens and Crows in Iron Age and Roman Britain

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

ojoa_360

D. SERJEANTSON AND J. MORRIS