Reports from the Environmental Archaeology Unit, York 99/12, 10 pp.

Evaluation of biological remains from excavations at Blanket Row

(Stakis Casino), Hull (site code STK98)

by

John Carrott, Allan Hall, Deborah Jaques, Harry Kenward, Frances Large and Darren Worthy

Summary

Samples of sediment and a small assemblage of hand-collected bone recovered from depositsof early post-medieval to modern date excavations at the Stakis Casino site, Blanket Row, Hull,have been evaluated for their bioarchaeological potential.

The plant and insect remains in some of the samples were extremely well preserved and,together, would provide a useful reconstruction of conditions, and to an extent activity, at thesite. In particular, there was strong evidence for the presence of litter and dung from the keepingof livestock. The material in hand warrants further analysis and any future development at thissite should be accompanied by a full programme of excavation, sampling and analysis.

The vertebrate remains recovered from this site do not appear to include domestic or kitchenwaste, but more likely represent the refuse from a number of industrial/craft activities, such asthe primary butchery and possibly tanning. Evidence from the Phase 2 vertebrate assemblagealso suggests the presence of refuse associated with skin and fur preparation.

It is clear that the deposits show potential for producing a large and well-preserved vertebrateassemblage should further excavation be undertaken. A basic archive should be made of thecurrent material, which should include biometrical and age-at-death data.

KEYWORDS: STAKIS CASINO SITE; BLANKET ROW; HULL; EVALUATION; POST-MEDIEVAL;

VICTORIAN; BONE; PLANT REMAINS; INSECT REMAINS; INTESTINAL PARASITE EGGS

Authors’ address: Prepared for:

Palaeoecology Research Services Humber Field ArchaeologyEnvironmental Archaeology Unit The Old SchoolDepartment of Biology Northumberland AvenueUniversity of York Hull HU2 0LNPO Box 373York YO10 5YW

Telephone: (01904) 433846/434475/434487 4 February 1999Fax: (01904) 433850

Reports from the EAU, York, 99/12 Evalu atio n: B lan ke t Ro w, Hull

2

Evaluation of biological remains from excavations at Blanket Row

(Stakis Casino), Hull (site code STK98)

Introduction

An archaeological excavation was carriedout by Humber Field Archaeology at BlanketRow, Hull, in December 1998. Twenty-fivesediment samples (‘GBA’ sensu Dobney etal. 1992) and four boxes (each boxapproximately 16 litres) of bone wererecovered from deposits of early post-medieval to modern date. Contexts wereprovisionally assigned to the following fourphases;

Phase 1 - natural alluvial clay

Phase 2 - late 15/16th Century

Phase 3 - 17/18th Century

Phase 4 - Victorian onwards

This material was submitted to the EAU forevaluation of its bioarchaeological potential.

Methods

Sediment samples

All 25 sediment samples (representing 14contexts) were inspected in the laboratoryand on the basis of this inspection andinformation supplied by the excavator, sixwere chosen for further work. A descriptionof the lithology of these samples wasrecorded using a standard pro forma andthen subsamples of 2 kg were taken forextraction of macrofossil remains, followingprocedures of Kenward et al. (1980; 1986).

Plant macrofossils were examined from theresidues and flots resulting from processing.All invertebrate macrofossils were recordedsemi-quantitatively using the scale describedby Kenward et al. (1986) and Kenward(1992). Records were made on a paper proforma for later transfer to a computerdatabase (using Paradox software) foranalysis and long-term storage.

Six of the samples were examined for theeggs of parasitic nematodes using themethods outlined by Dainton (1992).

Vertebrate remains

All of the bone was recorded in detail;subjective records were made ofpreservation, angularity (i.e. the nature of thebroken surfaces) and colour, whilstquantities and identifications were notedwhere appropriate. Additionally, semi-quantitative information was recorded foreach context concerning fragment size, doggnawing, burning, butchery and fresh breaks.Fragments not identified to species were,where possible, grouped into the categoriesof large mammal (assumed to be horse, cowor large cervid), medium mammal (assumedto be sheep, pig or small cervid) andunidentifiable.

Results

Sediment samples

The results of the investigations arepresented in phase order. Archaeologicalinformation and/or archaeological questions

Reports from the EAU, York, 99/12 Evalu atio n: B lan ke t Ro w, Hull

3

to be addressed (provided by the excavator)are given in square brackets.

Phase 2, late 15th/16th century

Context 126 [accumulated fill of gully or ditch - isthe material water deposited? Running or stagnant?Refuse deposition]Sample 13/T (2 kg processed)

Moist, mid to dark grey-brown, crumbly (slightlyplastic, sandy, clay silt, with mid brown clay siltinclusions. Fragments of mortar/plaster, brick/tile,pieces of partly burnt coal, charcoal, wood andmammal bone were present. Abundant concretionswere noted.

There was a moderate-sized residue of about 650 cm3

of which almost all was mineral material: mainlycinders, bone, gravel, mortar and sand; thewashover, which made up rather less than a third ofthe whole residue, was of cinders with somecharcoal. Traces of root ‘bark’ were the only otherplant remains observed. The deposit appeared tohave accumulated from occupation debris with onlya low organic content, unless organic matter withinthe original sediment had decayed.

The small flot consisted mostly of charcoal andcinder (to 10 mm), with a few plant fragments. Theonly invertebrate remains present were severalHeterodera sp. (soil nematode) cysts and threeephippia (resting eggs) of Daphnia (water fleas),indicating little more than the presence of soil, andat least temporary water, in the ditch.

The microfossil ‘squash’ revealed approximatelyequal parts organic detritus and inorganic material.A few fungal spores, fragments of plant silica,spores/pollen grains, diatoms (one form), and asingle live soil nematode were noted. No parasiteeggs were seen.

Context 144 [lower part of pit fill - evidence ofdomestic/industrial activity? Evidence for pitfunction?]Sample 4 (2 kg processed)

Moist, black, but internally olive brown, compressedherbaceous detritus in a matrix of humic silt, with

pellets of light grey clay. Small (6-20 mm) stonesand fragments of brick/tile were present.

The large residue of about 1 litre comprised about70% by volume organic material, of which a verylarge part was ‘strawy’ detritus, with rather littlewoody material; the inorganic fraction was mainlybrick/tile (a large clast) with sand and gravel.Waterlogged preservation was extremely good, withboth the monocotyledonous and dicotyledonous plantstem fragments pale and firm, and many of the fruitsand seeds in almost pristine condition. There was alittle evidence for mineralisation. Notable amongstthe well-preserved plant remains were the numerousinvolucres (flower heads) of knapweed or hardheads,Centaurea nigra L. and fruits of carrot, Daucuscarota L. which still bore their delicate spines. Theseand a substantial list of taxa of grassland andcornfield habitats, undoubtedly representing hay andstraw, indicate that the organic material was stablemanure or similar.

The very large flot produced a mixed assemblage of

beetles and bugs most of which probably originatedin a stable floor, where conditions appear to havebeen quite foul before clearance. There are also hintsof hay from a range of species including Hypera sp.(cf. Kenward and Hall 1997).

The microfossil ‘squash’ produced mostly organicdetritus, with some inorganic material (including afew fungal spores and hyphae, and a few diatoms(one or perhaps two kinds). A single Trichuris andtwo ?Ascaris eggs were seen.

Context 147 [primary fill of pit 148 - evidence ofdomestic/industrial activity. Evidence for pitfunction?]Sample 19 (2 kg processed)

Wet-moist, mid slightly orange-brown to very darkgrey/black, soft and slightly thixotropic (workingplastic), ?humic, slightly sandy, clay silt. Land snailswere present.

The small residue of about 500 cm3 consisted ofabout 70% mineral clasts (mainly sand with somegravel, coal and cinder). The rest comprised lessdense organic and inorganic debris, mainly pale-coloured ‘strawy’ debris, leather and further charcoaland cinders. There were moderate numbers of mostlyrather well preserved seeds and other plantfragments, and the material as a whole had an

Reports from the EAU, York, 99/12 Evalu atio n: B lan ke t Ro w, Hull

4

appearance perhaps characteristic of sweepings,from a floor, with animal hairs, fragments of verydecayed leather, tree leaves, with a componentprobably derived from hay and straw. There was alsosmall but distinct aquatic component.

The insect assemblage from this sample showedmixed states of preservation which could possibly bea result of in-ground decay, but more likely reflectsthe mixed pathways by which the fauna entered thedeposit. The aquatic insects such as Hydrobiusfuscipes (Linnaeus), Hydraena testacea Curtis andOchthebius sp. may have come from water used forlivestock, but could equally have fallen into the pit.Some of the other species (Harpalus rufipes(Degeer), Harpalus sp., Meligethes sp., Aphrophorasp., ?Neophilaenus sp.) may also have entered thedeposit as strays, having lived in the immediatesurroundings. Most of the assemblage, however,reflected dumped stable manure. The stable mayhave been cleared quickly as no really foul indicatorsare present.

The microfossil ‘squash’ was mostly inorganicmaterial with a trace of organic detritus. No parasiteeggs were seen.

Two land snail fragments were recovered, neither ofwhich could be identified.

Context 146 [secondary fill of pit 148 - evidence ofdomestic/industrial activity. Evidence for pitfunction?]Sample 1 (2 kg processed)

Moist, dark brown (locally greyish), slightly brittleand slightly compressed (working crumbly toplastic), sandy, humic silt, with flecks of mortar,brick/tile and twigs.

There was a moderate-sized residue of about 600 cm3

of which about 75% by volume was brick/tile,cinders, and sand, the washover consisting of twiggywoody detritus, mostly rather poorly preserved.Seeds were quite frequent and mostly fairly wellpreserved: for the most part they were from weeds ofcornfields and probably arrived with straw. A fewplants are more typical of biennial and perennialweed communities found close to habitation werepresent, notably greater celandine (Chelidoniummajus L.) and feverfew (Tanacetum parthenium (L.)Schultz Bip.); it may not be a coincidence that both

have been widely used for their supposed or actualmedicinal properties.

The modest-sized beetle assemblage again suggestedstable manure but with no clear indicators of hay.The most abundant beetle was the dung beetleAphodius granarius (Linnaeus), and several otherspecies also pointed to the existence of very foulconditions.

The microfossil ‘squash’ was mostly organic detrituswith some inorganic grains. A few fragments ofplant silica and fungal hyphae, and a single?Trichuris egg were noted.

Two land snails were recovered; these wereidentified as Pupilla/Lauria sp.

Context 174 [pit fill - evidence ofdomestic/industrial activity? Evidence for pitfunction?]Sample 16 (2 kg processed)

Moist, mid to dark olive-grey brown (locally darkerwith ?charcoal or organics, stiff to crumbly (workingplastic), slightly sandy, silty clay. The sedimentincluded patches of hardened clay pellets (possiblydried out in the past) and some lumps of nearly pureclay.

There was a moderately large residue of about 600cm3 of which almost all comprised brick/tilefragments and olive silty concretions (the latter withTrichuris eggs); the tiny washover consisted of a fewcm3 of fine plant detritus, probably mostly verydecayed wood, but with some rather poorly preservedblackberry (Rubus fruticosus agg.) seeds and a fewwell preserved fig (Ficus carica L.) seeds. Thereseems little doubt that the contents of this pitoriginally included faecal material, of which only atrace now remains.

A few very poorly preserved insects were present inthis sample and probably represent individualsattarcted to foul matter, together with somebackground fauna.

The microfossil ‘squash’ was mostly inorganicmaterial, with much organic detritus and a fewfungal hyphae. Three Trichuris eggs (two of whichwere sufficiently well-preserved as to be measurable)were seen.

Reports from the EAU, York, 99/12 Evalu atio n: B lan ke t Ro w, Hull

5

Phase 3, 17th/18th century

Context 143 [open ground/general build-up - isthere evidence of cultivation or waste ground?]Sample 10 (2 kg processed)

Moist, dark brown, crumbly to compressed, humicsilt, with amorphous organic sediment andherbaceous detritus. Burnt coal, wood, mammal bone(some possibly burnt), land snails and ?marinemollusc fragments were present.

The rather large residue (of about 800 cm3) consistedof about 33% by volume organic detritus (mainlywood fragments to 30 mm), the rest sand with somebrown concretions, gravel and cinders; through bothfractions there were many clasts (to 10 mm) ofbrown undisaggregated slightly humic silt matrix.There concentration of identifiable plant remainswas low, but preservation usually good, though manyspecimens still carried some silt. Most of the taxarecorded are likely to have been weeds growing incornfields (especially corncockle, Agrostemmagithago and wild radish, Raphanus raphanistrum),probably remnants of a component of straw in thedeposit, with only very small traces of taxa likely tohave arrived in peat, hay or other debris. It ispossible that this deposit contains very decayedstable manure, the degree of decompositionconsistent with accumulation in the open in asurface-laid deposit.

A modest-sized flot was produced, consisting largelyof ‘twiggy’ plant fragments. The insect remains wererather poorly preserved, reflecting their origins onopen ground. At least half of the beetle speciesnoted would have lived in rather foul conditions andthe presence of grain beetles suggests that stablemanure or horse dung was in the vicinity. Many ofthe remaining beetles would have arrived asbackground fauna or might have becomeincorporated in the deposit through trampling.

The microfossil ‘squash’ showed mostly organicdetritus with some inorganic material. A few fungalspores and hyphae, fragments of plant silica, andspores/pollen grains were recorded. No parasite eggswere seen.

A single land snail Oxychilus cellarius (Müller) wasidentified.

Vertebrate remains

Preservation of the vertebrate remains from allrepresented phases was mainly recorded as ‘good’(24 contexts) or fair (11 contexts). Whilst the brokensurfaces of many fragments were sharp, a few bonesin four contexts (50, 51, 54 and 55) were battered inappearance. A single extremely rounded fragmentwas noted from Context 77. Fragments from mostdeposits were brown or fawn in colour and showedlittle intra-context variation. Material from a smallnumber of contexts (5, 9, 29 and 30) was slightlymore variable, and some bones from Contexts 144and 146 were stained black.

Fresh breakage and dog gnawing was observed inmost contexts, but few bones were affected. OnlyContexts 44, 50 and 51 contained burnt fragments.Evidence of butchery was mostly not extensive, withthe exception of Context 134 (Phase 2), wherebutchered fragments represented 20-50% of theassemblage. Bones from this deposit included sheepcrania which had been chopped longitudinally,presumably for removal of the brain; this butcherypractice was also noted from Context 50 (Phase 2)and Context 77 (Phase 4). Split cattle vertebra werenoted throughout the assemblage (Contexts 5, 28, 57and 126) and from all phases, indicating thechopping of carcases into ‘sides’.

Three cattle metatarsals from Contexts 44, 82 (Phase3) and 5 (Phase 4) were sawn across the base of theshaft, with only the distal articulation remaining.These fragments possibly suggest bone-working, theshaft being taken elsewhere for manufacture intoartefacts. Alternatively, they may represent thebutchering of carcases by removing the distal limbelements using a saw rather than a cleaver.

A pathological condition known as osteochondritisdissecans was noted on almost all the cattlemetacarpals from all phases represented. The lesionswere mainly noted on the medial portion of theproximal articular surfaces. Although the aetiologyof this condition is not fully understood, it isbelieved that the lesions result from sudden physicalstress or trauma to the joint.

Phase 2

The vertebrate assemblage from Phase 2 amountedto 110 identified and 78 unidentified fragments.

Reports from the EAU, York, 99/12 Evalu atio n: B lan ke t Ro w, Hull

6

Twenty-six fragments were measurable, whilst sevenwere mandibles with teeth in situ (Table 1).

Cattle and caprovid remains predominated, with thenext most numerous species being cat. A singlecontext (79) produced 13 of the 16 cat fragments andrepresented at least two animals, whilst part of askull was recovered from Context 134. Knife marks,probably associated with skinning, were noted ontwo cat bones (pelvis and tibia) from Context 50, anda possible chop mark was recorded on a doghumerus (Context 146).

A large carnivore baculum (penis bone), identifiedfrom Context 134, may represent a big dog or mayperhaps be something larger such as wolf or bear. Asyet it has not been definitely identified.

Only three horse fragments were noted, but one(tibia) from Context 134 appeared to have beenchopped. Context 134 also produced a single,somewhat flattened antler tine which could not beidentified to species because of its rather erodedsurface.

A range of skeletal elements was present for cattle,but maxilla and mandible fragments, isolated teethand metapodials predominated. Caprovid fragmentsshowed a similar pattern, although metapodials(mainly from Context 134) accounted for 23 of the43 fragments recorded.

It is clear that some aspects of this assemblage(particularly material from the fills, 134, 146 of pit148) suggest waste associated with the preparation ofskins and possibly furs.

Phase 3

Phase 3 deposits produced a small assemblageamounting to only 93 fragments, of which 49 wereidentified to species, 22 were measurable and sixwere mandibles with teeth in situ (Table 2).

The limited range of species included cattle,caprovid and pig, with single fragments of chickenand goose. As observed for the previous period, anexamination of the representation of body partspresent shows that cattle head and distal limbelements were most numerous; metapodialsaccounted for almost half of the cattle fragments. Noclear pattern was apparent for the caprovid remainsbecause too few fragments were recovered.

Phase 4

Deposits from Phase 4 could only be dated to theVictorian period onwards, so are, therefore, ratherbroadly dated. Two-hundred and thirty-threefragments of bone were recovered, of which 98 wereidentifiable, 18 were measurable and 14 weremandibles with teeth in situ of use for providing age-at-death data (Table 3).

The bones recovered from these deposits show asimilar preponderance of cattle and caprovids to theprevious phases. Skeletal element representation forcattle is again dominated by metapodials, with somemandible fragments and isolated teeth. Caprovids,on the other hand, are clearly represented mainly bymandibles, and, to a lesser extent, by horncores,maxilla and isolated teeth. Metapodials (particularlymetatarsals) were still present, along with a smallnumber of meat-bearing fragments.

Part of a dog skeleton was also recovered from thisphase (Context 48), although only the two femoraand a quantity of rib and vertebra fragments werepresent.

Discussion and recommendations

Sediment samples

Most of the samples produced assemblagesof plant and invertebrate macrofossils whichindicated that further analysis would providea substantial amount of archaeologicalinformation. Larger subsamples would berequired in order to recover sufficient insectremains, however. Preservation variedbetween, and sometimes within, samples butwas in some cases exceptionally good.Context 144, in particular, yielded plantmaterial which might serve as a ‘type’example, and it and the accompanyinginsect remains should certainly be properlyanalysed and reported. Indeed, the depositsfrom which these samples were taken shouldnot be destroyed without a properlydesigned programme of excavation and

Reports from the EAU, York, 99/12 Evalu atio n: B lan ke t Ro w, Hull

7

post-excavation analysis, includinginvestigations of plant and invertebratemacrofossils.

The presence of the eggs of parasiticintestinal nematodes in three of the samplesindicated that faecal material was acomponent of these deposits. However, theconcentration of eggs was very low, showingonly ‘background’ levels, and not necessarilyindicative of primarily faecal material. Nofurther work on the eggs of intestinalparasitic nematodes, or other microfossils,is recommended.

Vertebrate remains

The vertebrate assemblages from all phaseswere dominated by cattle and caprovidremains, particularly metapodials. Bonesrepresenting ‘heads’ were also morenumerous than meat-bearing elements (suchas scapulae, humeri, pelves and femora)which were mostly quite scarce.Assemblages with a high proportion of headsand distal limb elements are generallyinterpretable as primary butchery waste.However, concentrations of metapodials canalso be interpreted as tanners’ waste, theskins having been delivered to the tannerywith the lower limbs still attached. The Phase2 assemblage strongly suggested theinclusion of waste from specialist activities,possibly associated with the preparation ofskins and furs. The vertebrate remains fromthe later phases pointed to continueddumping of specialist waste, although theincrease in caprovid ‘head’ remains in Phase4 may represent a larger component ofprimary butchery refuse.

The vertebrate remains recovered from thissite do not appear to include domestic orkitchen waste, but more likely represent therefuse from a number of industrial/craft

activities. The evidence from plants andinsects for litter and dung may indicate thatthe cattle and sheep were kept nearby priorto slaughter, although the remains mayequally have originated in the stabling ofhorses.

It is clear that the deposits show potentialfor producing a large and well-preservedvertebrate assemblage. Together withinformation from other sites in Hull,particularly from the excavations nearby ina different area of Blanket Row, thismaterial could provide important data forcomparison and synthesis. A basic archiveshould be made of the well-dated materialfrom the current assemblage, which shouldinclude biometrical and age-at-death data.

This excavation in Blanket Row hasprovided a further opportunity to examinelate-medieval and post-medieval deposits inthis part of Hull, where there is clearlyconsiderable evidence from plant and animalremains for past human activity and livingconditions. Some extremely well preservedand interpretatively useful remains have beenrecovered and merit further consideration; ifthe deposits are to be destroyed they mustcertainly be excavated, recorded andanalysed; if they are to be preserved in situ,they should be afforded protection whichtakes account of the instability of the organicmaterials.

Storage requirements

The remaining sediment, residues, flots andextracted invertebrate remains and boneshould all be retained to permit further study.

Archive

Reports from the EAU, York, 99/12 Evalu atio n: B lan ke t Ro w, Hull

8

All material is currently stored in theEnvironmental Archaeology Unit, Universityof York, along with paper and electronicrecords pertaining to the work describedhere.

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to Humber FieldArchaeology for providing the material andthe archaeological information and toEnglish Heritage for enabling AH and HK towork on this material.

References

Dainton, M. (1992). A quick, semi-quantitativemethod for recording nematode gut parasite eggsfrom archaeological deposits. Circaea, the Journalof the Association for Environmental Archaeology 9(for 1991), 58-63.

Dobney, K., Hall, A. R., Kenward, H. K. and Milles,A. (1992). A working classification of sample typesfor environmental archaeology. Circaea, the Journalof the Association for Environmental Archaeology 9(for 1991), 24-6.

Kenward, H. K. (1992). Rapid recording ofarchaeological insect remains - a reconsideration.Circaea, the Journal of the Association forEnvironmental Archaeology 9 (for 1991), 81-8.

Kenward, H. K., Engleman, C., Robertson, A., andLarge, F. (1986). Rapid scanning of urbanarchaeological deposits for insect remains. Circaea3 (for 1985), 163-72.

Kenward, H. and Hall, A. (1997). Enhancingbioarchaeological interpretation using indicatorgroups: stable manure as a paradigm. Journal ofArchaeological Science 24, 663-73.

Kenward, H. K., Hall, A. R. and Jones, A. K. G.(1980). A tested set of techniques for the extractionof plant and animal macrofossils from waterloggedarchaeological deposits. Science and Archaeology22, 3-15.

Reports from the EAU, York, 99/12 Evalu atio n: B lan ke t Ro w, Hull

9

Table 1. Hand-collected vertebrate remains from Phase 2, Blanket Row (Stakis Casino site),Hull. Key: No. frags = total number of fragments; No. meas = number of measurable fragments;No. mand = number of mandibles with teeth in situ; No. teeth = number of isolated teeth of usefor providing age-at-death.

Species No. meas No. mand No. teeth No. frags

Carnivora carnivore - - - 1

Canis f. domestic dog - - - 3

Felis f. domestic cat 6 - - 16

Equus f. domestic horse - - - 3

Sus f. domestic pig - - - 3

Cervid deer - - - 1

Bos f. domestic cattle 5 2 2 35

Caprovid sheep/goat 12 5 43

Anser sp. goose 1 - - 2

Anas sp. duck 1 - - 1

Gallus f. domestic chicken 1 - - 1

Corvus coraxL. raven - - - 1

Sub-total 26 7 2 110

Unidentified bird - - - 1

Unidentified fish - - - 2

Unidentifiable - - - 75

Sub-total - - - 78

Total 26 7 2 188

Reports from the EAU, York, 99/12 Evalu atio n: B lan ke t Ro w, Hull

10

Table 2. Hand-collected vertebrate remains from Phase 3, Blanket Row (Stakis Casino site),Hull. Key: No. frags = total number of fragments; No. meas = number of measurable fragments;No. mand = number of mandibles with teeth in situ.

Species No. meas No. mand No. frags

Sus f. domestic pig - 1 3

Bos f. domestic cattle 14 3 29

Caprovid sheep/goat 8 2 15

Anser sp. goose - - 1

Gallus f. domestic chicken - - 1

Sub-total 22 6 49

Unidentifiable - - 44

Total 22 6 93

Table 3. Hand-collected vertebrate remains from Phase 4, Blanket Row (Stakis Casino site),Hull. Key: No. frags = total number of fragments; No. meas = number of measurable fragments;No. mand = number of mandibles with teeth in situ; No. teeth = number of isolated teeth of usefor providing age-at-death.

Species No. meas No. mand No. teeth No. frags

Oryctolagus cuniculus (L.) rabbit - - - 1

Canis f. domestic dog 3 1 - 19

Felis f. domestic cat 1 - - 1

Sus f. domestic pig - - - 1

Bos f. domestic cattle 9 2 1 28

Caprovid sheep/goat 4 11 - 45

Anser sp. goose 1 - - 3

Sub-total 18 14 1 98

Unidentified fish - - - 2

Unidentified - - - 133

Sub-total - - - 135

Total 18 14 1 233