http://france.elsevier.com/direct/GEOBIO/

Geobios 39 (2006) 328–336

* CorrespondE-mail addr

0016-6995/$ -doi:10.1016/j.g

Madonna del Piano (Sesto Fiorentino, Florence, central Italy)

ox and dog: a case of intentional Iron Age inhumation

Madonna del Piano (Sesto Fiorentino, Florence, Italie centrale),

bœuf et chien : un cas d’inhumation intentionnel de l’âge du fer

Sandra Cencetti a, Paul Mazza b,*, Filiberto Chilleri a, Fabio Cozzini a

a Museum of Natural History of Florence, University of Florence, Via La Pira 4, 50121 Florence, Italyb Department of Earth Sciences and Museum of Natural History of Florence, University of Florence, Via La Pira 4, 50121 Florence, Italy

Received 30 January 2004; accepted 17 December 2004Available online 28 February 2006

Abstract

Two almost complete and articulated skeletons of a small-sized 15-year-old shorthorn ox and of a 3–4-year-old dog were found associated toIron Age human burials at Madonna del Piano, in Sesto Fiorentino, near Florence. The two skeletons were ritually buried. The find adds toanother case of cattle burial also found in the area, and therefore attests to a penetration and persistence of late Neolithic and Bronze Agenorthern and eastern European practices in Italy. The specimens provide important evidence on the habits and believes of Iron Age circum-Mediterranean human populations. The ox reveals that castration was accomplished late in the animal’s growth, but also that cattle were usedfor heavy work, though being worshiped animals.© 2006 Elsevier SAS. All rights reserved.

Résumé

Deux squelettes presque complets et articulés d’un bœuf de petite taille aux cornes courtes, âgé de 15 ans, et d’un vieux chien de trois–quatreans ont été trouvés près de sépultures humaines de l’Âge du Fer à Madonna del Piano, à Sesto Fiorentino, près de Florence. Les deux squelettesont été enterrés rituellement. La découverte s’ajoute à un autre cas d’inhumation de bétail découvert aussi dans la région, et atteste donc de lapénétration et de la persistance en Italie de pratiques de l’Europe du Nord et de l’Est datant du Néolithique et de l’Âge du Bronze. Les spécimenstémoignent de façon évident des habitudes et des croyances des populations humaines circum-méditerranéennes de l’Âge du Fer. Le bœuf révèleque la castration a été réalisée tard durant la croissance de l’animal, mais aussi que le bétail a été utilisé pour des travaux lourds, bien que lesanimaux aient été vénérés.© 2006 Elsevier SAS. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Domestic animal inhumation; Iron Age; Italy

Mots clés : Inhumation d’animaux domestiques ; Âge du Fer ; Italie

1. Introduction

A 1994 excavation, carried out by the Soprintendenza Ar-cheologica per la Toscana in the area of Madonna del Piano, at

ing author. Tel.: +39 055 275 7526; fax: +39 055 218 628.ess: pmazza@unifi.it (P. Mazza).

see front matter © 2006 Elsevier SAS. All rights reserved.eobios.2004.12.002

Sesto Fiorentino (Florence), unearthed a late example of inten-tional animal inhumation associated to human burial (Fig. 1).Two almost complete and articulated skeletons of a dog and ofa small-sized shorthorn ox were lying nearby two human ske-letons, one complete, the other represented by few articulatedlower limb bones (De Marinis and Salvini, 1999). The twoanimals lay about 5 m from one another. The ox rested on itsleft side, in an elliptical and concave cavity about 2 m long and

Fig. 1. Madonna del Piano: plan of the excavation.

S. Cencetti et al. / Geobios 39 (2006) 328–336 329

1.5 m wide. The dog was lying on its belly, in a natural crouch-ing position, in a grave 94 cm long and 40 cm wide. Both theanimals and the humans were orientated NW–SE, but in oppo-site directions, the animals having their heads pointing north.Pit tombs have also been found in the area. The site has beenarcheologically dated to the Iron Age (G. De Marinis, pers.comm. 2002).

The arrangement and orientation, but also the completeness,of the Madonna del Piano skeletons intimates the peoples’ fol-lowing advanced, complex rites, their having a belief in theafterlife; furthermore, the skeletons’ co-occurrence could indi-cate the existence of a sacred area, or a graveyard: the associa-tion of the carcasses with human burials clearly indicate inten-tional inhumation, possibly in a ritual context (Crabtree, 1995;

Sandweiss and Wing, 1997). A few years before the Madonnadel Piano discovery, another ritually buried cattle was found atSemitella, again near Sesto Fiorentino (Sarti and Anastasio,2001). This second example lied under a layer radiometricallydated to 2540–2570 cal. BC; it is therefore referable to theFinal Copper Age (Bell Beaker facies). Intentional cattle inhu-mations have been reported from many Neolithic sites of cen-tral Europe (Maran, 1998; Pollex, 1999). Lüning (1996) andPollex (1999) claimed that this phenomenon came to a closeat the end of the Neolithic, around 2000 years BC.

Sarti and Anastasio (2001), however, argued that ox burialsbecame progressively more common from the Late Neolithic tothe Copper and Early Bronze Ages, and were particularly dif-fused in northern and eastern Europe (Banner, 1956; Gallus,

S. Cencetti et al. / Geobios 39 (2006) 328–336330

1940). The two authors asserted that the Semitella ox repre-sents an isolated case in Italy of such a practice in the Aeneo-lithic period. Madonna del Piano proves an even longer persis-tence of these rituals in Italy, but also that these rites mighthave been more common than formerly supposed.

Animals were buried with humans for a number of reasons.Animal offerings were a sign of distinguished status; alterna-tively, they symbolized a modification in status and role, inwhich case, the choice of the breed, age, sex or color of theanimal, was crucial (Reitz and Wing, 1999). Cattle, in particu-lar, were venerated because of their great economic import;they were a valued sign of status among many populations,as, for instance, Anglo-Norman peoples in Ireland(McCormick, 1991). Nevertheless, cattle skeletons are less fre-quently connected with human burials than are the skeletons ofother animals (Behrens, 1964).

Sometimes animals possessed symbolic significance(Bartosiewicz, 1995; Plug, 1987). They were revered as an im-age of a deity, they could be used to ensure success in thepassage to the afterlife, or even be called upon to assist thedeceased in their new situation. Animals also were offered asan enticement or as homage to a deity. Dogs could be buried inplace of more valuable animals, such as cattle (Behrens, 1964).

Sarti and Anastasio (2001) distinguished between differentkinds of burials, on account of the number and species of bur-ied animals, shape of pits, type of deposition, association withhuman skeletons, but also of the completeness of skeletons aswell as the possible presence of gifts or goods. According tothe two authors, the Semitella ox is an example of a very sim-ple animal burial, as the peculiar arrangement of the skeleton,which was clearly fit into a cavity, as well as the absence ofany adornment or gift, manifestly attests.

Distinguishing between animals interred as a grave gift andthose offered as a sacrifice is difficult, and depends completelyupon the established cause of death of the specimens. Becausewe do not have the instruments used to kill the animals, whichwould readily attest to their immolation, the interpretation ofthe function of their deposition hinges on the reconstructionof their paleobiological characteristics.

2. Description of the specimens

Most of the ox skeleton is badly crushed. The bone frag-ments conformed to the underlying substratum; only the extre-mities survived the deformation and are in a better state of pre-servation. The skull was twisted rightwards and tilted in anunnatural position; the neck-bone, as well, was oddly bent up-wards. The skull, severely flattened, consists of a mosaic offragments, and has no horns. The whole intercornual area isnot conserved. Both mandibles are preserved, but they arebadly crushed with a slight fault in the symphysis. The upperand lower cheek teeth are all retained, undamaged. They are soheavily worn that the occlusal surfaces sometimes reach thecollars. The backbone was abnormally curved, convex out, ap-parently to fit the perimeter of the graven. The pelvis was tiltedventrally. The limbs were unnaturally arranged. The fore limbswere bent in a crouching position, while the rear limbs were

curiously extended forwards. The long bones are extensivelybroken by transverse fractures, some of which faulted. Fourflake scars, produced by the impact of a tool 11.70 mm wide,presumably a sort of chisel, are present on both sides of thedistal epiphysis of the right humerus as well as on the caudalsurface of the lateral condyle (Fig. 2). These scars are variouslyinclined, but each shows a clear impact point. Along the borderopposite to the impact point of one of these scars, there is asmall uplifted splinter which recalls what orthopedists call“green-wood splintering”. Senile alterations have been ob-served on some articulations. Crescent-shaped eburnation andlarge geodetic cavities are the most serious alterations. Theyhave been observed on the cranial articular surface of the atlas,indicating deterioration to complete removal of cartilage,sclerosis of subcondral bone, and direct bone-to-bone scraping(Fig. 2). Eburnations have been also found on humeral and fe-moral joints.

The canid skeleton is more crushed than that of the ox, be-cause of its far weaker bones. The skull suffered mosaic frag-mentation, and is badly crushed. All the long bones are brokenby transverse fractures. Pedogenic carbonates encrust the edgesof most of these fractures (Fig. 2).

3. Methods

A starting point of the analysis was assessing the biometricalcharacteristics of our specimens (Figs. 3–5). For this, weadopted von den Driesch’s (1976) measuring points, completedby the introduction of some new ones which were thought tomore effectively describe the specimens.

Several methodologies were used to reconstruct the paleo-biological characteristics of the two animals. The ox’s sexwas assessed using Nobis’ (1954) index on metapodial bones(Nobis index = Bp/GLx100). Its age was inferred by referringto Habermehl’s (1961) and Barone’s (1981) table, while theheight at withers was calculated using Koudelka’s (1885) andMatolsci’s (1970) coefficients. Body mass assessments werebased on Prange et al. (1979), Schmidt-Nielsen (1984) and Re-itz and Quitmyer (1988), allometric scaling, as well as onScott’s (1990) diagrams. The dog’s age, height at withers, andweight were established following, in that order, the indicationsof Barone (1981,1995) and Koudelka (1885) and Van Valken-burgh (1990). We also used De Grossi Mazzorin and Minniti’s(2000) sturdiness index for dogs, which was derived from VanValkenburgh’s (1990) method.

Bone modification also was examined. It included the as-sessment of fractures and bone surface alterations. Behrens-meyer’s (1978) weathering stages were carefully recorded tounderstand for how long bones have been exposed before defi-nitive inhumation. The fracture typology adopted here is thatproposed by Marshall (1989) and Lyman (1994).

4. Results

The ox skeleton is indeed badly preserved, most of its ele-ments having suffered considerable mechanical deformation.Surprisingly though, bone surface alteration is so modest that

Fig. 2. 1. B. taurus longifrons: right portion of the cranial articular surface of the atlas showing crescent-shaped eburnation and large geodetic cavities. 2. B. tauruslongifrons: 2a, distal epiphysis of right humerus showing scars; 2b, c, particular of the scars. 3. C. lupus familiaris: right hemimandibule. 4. C. lupus familiaris: threemetatarsal bones modified by faulted fractures and with carbonate concretions.

S. Cencetti et al. / Geobios 39 (2006) 328–336 331

most of the elements can be easily accommodated into Beh-rensmeyer’s (1978) weathering stage 0.

Sexing cattle is often problematic because of the modifica-tions induced by castration. The value of Nobis’s index ob-tained on the left metacarpal bone (32.98) is fully suggestive

of a male individual, whereas those obtained on both metatar-sals (22.5 in the right metatarsal, 22.9 in the left) indicate acastrated specimen. The age of castration is a crucial issue. Infact, if the animal was castrated relatively late, it possibly hadattained male proportions in some of its bones. This is indir-

S. Cencetti et al. / Geobios 39 (2006) 328–336332

ectly consistent with the sturdiness index value: falling at theminimum values of the fields expected for both males and cas-trates, this index reveals that the Madonna del Piano ox wasfairly slender.

The bone degenerations seen on many of the ox bones arethose typical of an aged specimen. Aging senile animals is pos-sible only through tooth wear. The Madonna del Piano speci-men has cheek teeth worn as those of an over 15-year-old in-dividual.

Fig. 3. Measurements of the anterior limb of B. taurus longifrons.Measurementcaptions (Figs. 3 and 6). Humerus. GL greatest length. GLC greatest lengthfrom the caput. DP depth of the proximal epiphysis. SD latero-medial diameterof the diaphyses. BT trochlear breadth. BD breadth of the distal epiphysis.Radius. GL greatest length. PL physiologic length. BP breadth of the proximalepiphysis. DP depth of the proximal epiphysis. SD latero-medial diameter ofthe diaphyses. BD breadth of the distal epiphysis. DD depth of the distalepiphysis. Coxal bone. LA length of the acetabulum (lip included). Femur. DCdepth of the Caput Femoris. Tibia. GL greatest length. BP breadth of theproximal epiphysis. SD latero-medial diameter of the diaphyses. CDcircumference of the diaphyses. BD breadth of the distal epiphysis. DD depthof the distal epiphysis. Malleolar bone. GD greatest depth. Calcaneum. GLgreatest length. GB greatest breadth. Tb distance between the apex of thetuberosity to the beak. BT greatest breadth of the tuberosity. DT greatest depthof the tuberosity. BC greatest breadth of the corpus. DC greatest depth of thecorpus. Astragalus. GLtot greatest length. GLm greatest length of the medialhalf. GLl greatest length of the lateral half. BP greatest proximal breadth. BPagreatest breadth of the proximal articular surface. BD greatest distal breadth.Dm greatest depth of the medial half. Dl greatest depth of the lateral half.Metapodial bones. GL greatest length. PL1 medial physiologic length. PL2lateral physiologic length. BP breadth of the proximal epiphysis. DP depth ofthe proximal epiphysis. SD latero-medial diameter of the diaphyses. BDbreadth of the distal epiphysis. DD depth of the distal epiphysis. Phalanges.GL greatest length. GLpe greatest length of the peripheral half. BP proximalbreadth. SD latero-medial diameter of the diaphyses. BD distal breadth. DLSgreatest diagonal length of the sole. MBS middle breadth of the sole. Ld lengthof the dorsal surface.

Fig. 4. Measurements of the posterior limb of B. taurus longifrons.

Fig. 5. Measurements of limb bones of C. lupus familiaris.

S. Cencetti et al. / Geobios 39 (2006) 328–336 333

The ox appears to be a rather small-sized animal. The great-est lengths of the metacarpal and metatarsal bones (Figs. 3 and4) confirm, respectively, that the withers were 106–110 cmhigh, in the range of a steer, or possibly of a small-sized male.It is smaller than Neolithic and Bronze Age specimens of thesubspecies (Fig. 6). Cattle of this size are known from severalEuropean Iron Age sites, especially in Hungary (Bökönky,1974), but also in Germany and UK (Audoin-Rouzeau, 1991)(Fig. 7). The proximal transverse diameter of the radius, as wellas the length of the metatarsal bone (Scott, 1990) suggest abody weight around 445–458 kg.

Because of the bad conditions of the forehead, it was impos-sible to tell if the animal was hornless in origin, if the hornswere destroyed during diagenesis, or if they were intentionallyextirpated. The frontal area, however, is broad enough to sug-gest that the animal likely had horns.

The mosaic fragmentation of the canid skull, as well as thetransverse fractures which dissect its long bones, are clear evi-dence of diagenetic modification due to sediment load. As inthe ox, most of the bone surfaces of the canid skeleton are un-altered. Evidence of modest exposure is visible on both radii aswell as on the diaphyses of the metapodials. The lateral face of

Fig. 6. Measurements of B. taurus longifrons and C. lupus familiaris bones from N

the metacarpal bone, together with the medial and plantar faceof the right metatarsal bone, are more intensely weathered(weathering stage 3). Root etchings occur patchily on the dia-physes as well as on the distal epiphyses of the metapodialbones.

The unworn state and early yellowish staining of the teeth,as well as the sealing of the iliac crest, suggest that the dog is3–4 years of age. This is confirmed by the absence of senilemodifications. No pathological deformation was observedeither. The presence of the penial bone clearly indicates a maleindividual. The animal was about 48–50 cm high at the withersand around 25 kg of weight. The height at the withers, plottedagainst the sturdiness index, indicates that the specimen was aeumetrical dog, e.g. a relatively small-sized representative, notyet the size of a lapdog. Consistently, the stylopodial bones arenot brachymelic.

Another aspect that could be of great interest was establish-ing if there were human-induced modifications linked with pos-sible processing of either of the two carcasses. This could tellus a great deal on how humans and animals interrelated. None-theless, no such alteration have been observed on either car-casses.

eolithic and Bronze Age localities.

Fig. 7. A. Sesto ox’s height at withers, calculated from the greatest length of themetatarsals, against prehistoric to present-day Hungarian oxen (Bökönky, 1974;Audoin-Rouzeau, 1991). B. Boessneck’s (1956) method; Z: Zalkin’s (1960)method; B: Height at withers of Iron Age European oxen calculated from thegreatest length of the metacarpals.

S. Cencetti et al. / Geobios 39 (2006) 328–336334

5. Inferences

The systematics of the ox confirms the post-Neolithic dat-ing of the site. In fact, the skeletal and dental characteristics ofthe ox match those of an aged shorthorn humpless ox of thesubspecies Bos taurus longifrons (syn. = brachyceros), asmall-sized short-horned, or totally hornless ox unknown inpre-Neolithic sites (Dottrens, 1947). For this reason, this oxis normally considered a domestic breed.

The old age of the ox, as well as its size and proportions,which are halfway between those of a bull and an ox, intimatesthat bulls were castrated relatively late in their puberty. Thisimposes a use of oxen for work. The eburnations on the cervi-cal, humeral and femoral joints, actually suggest that the Ma-donna del Piano ox was possibly used for traction, or evenburden bearing. The crescent-shaped eburnation on the cranialface of the axis indicates strain on the atlas-occipital articula-tion probably caused by a yoke for agricultural work.

The peculiar arrangement of the ox skeleton, as well as themarks found on the fore limb bones, indicate that the ox wasnot sacrificed, but ritually buried after its natural death. Thesevering of some joint ligaments of the specimen, but mostof all the unusual forward extension of its hind limbs, suggestthat the buriers had to win the resistance of rigor mortis to fitthe carcass into the deposition pit (Binford, 1981). Dead un-gulates often inflate because of putrefaction gasses, and rollover their back with their stiff limbs stretched to the sky(Weigelt, 1989). While the resistance of the fore limb can be

won by cutting the elbow ligaments, the stiffen hind limb,which has much stronger ligaments, can only be forced bycutting the gluteal ligaments and rotating forwards the limbas a solid rod. The lesions observed in the elbow are actuallyconsistent with processing aimed at detaching the triceps mus-cle and tendon. Therefore, humans apparently waited until theanimal passed away. This fact, and the following prevention ofconsumption, imply that cattle were probably sacred amongthese Iron Age populations.

Such a conclusion is supported by the striking correspon-dence to the other cited case of Italian cattle burial, Semitella:both specimens were lying on their left side, were orientated,had their limbs accurately folded to fit their carcasses in pits,and show no evidence of slaughtering or of carcass processing.Nonetheless, the two oxen also differ in some respects. Ac-cording to Sarti and Anastasio (2001) the Semitella ox is anover three and a half years old cow, while our specimen isextremely old.

Analogies with these Italian examples of cattle burials canbe found in Hungary, and more precisely in the sites of Üllö(Gallus, 1940) and Hódmezövásárhely (Banner, 1956), of theso-called Pécel-Baden Culture, at Töpliz, in Denmark(Gandert, 1953), which has been attributed to the so-calledKugelamphorenkultur of the Late Copper Age and at Mole-naarsgraaf, in Holland (Louwe Kooijmans, 1974). Worth ofnote, in particular, is the Üllö ox, which was found lying onits left side, as the Italian specimens, in a simple pit.

The skeletal characteristics of the canid match those of adomestic dog, Canis lupus familiaris. The carcass does notseem to have been processed, and its joints do not show evi-dence of post-mortem manipulation. The carcass, therefore,was likely set in the pit before rigor mortis occurred. This fact,together with the relatively young age of the specimen, inti-mates that the animal might have been sacrificed, but, becauseof the skeleton’s very bad state of preservation, we could notfind evidence to prove it. As the ox, the dog also seems tohave been an animal of value. In many cultures dogs’ habitof burying bones has generated the belief in the dog as a com-panion to the soul on its journey to the underworld. A dog canhelp to protect the soul from the impure spirits who fight totake possession of it after death, or it can free the soul from itsearthly bindings so that it can ascend to the heavens and jointhe gods. Sometimes dogs also served as guardians in burials:the dogs that guarded the house in life could ritually guard itafter death. Dog’s use as a guardian or as a companion in theafterlife could explain the burial of the Madonna del Pianospecimen in a crouching, or possibly begging position.

Unfortunately, at the moment there is no indication that oxand dog were buried simultaneously. We can not even demon-strate that the burial of these two animals is somehow relatedto those of the humans in the site.

6. Conclusions

The Madonna del Piano ox and dog provide us importantinsights on the habits, but also on the believes of Iron Age

Ba

Ba

Ba

Be

Be

Bin

Bo

Bö

Cra

De

De

Do

Dri

Ga

Ga

Ha

Ko

Lo

Lü

Ly

Ma

Ma

Ma

Mc

S. Cencetti et al. / Geobios 39 (2006) 328–336 335

circum-Mediterranean human populations. Furthermore, it at-tests to a late survival of late Neolithic and Bronze Age cere-monial behaviors.

The ritual burial of the Madonna del Piano animals withhumans indicates that these populations still were capable offeeling close to the animal world. Animals must have played alarge role in the ritual practices of these peoples, or in theirsymbolism. We suppose an approaching to a feeling of near-identity with a species or a particular animal regarded as theancestor or as the repository of the group’s power. Alterna-tively, cattle and dogs might have been regarded as the treasu-ries of fitting symbols for the essentially mysterious and super-ior otherness of the holy. The ceremonial behavior shown forthe Madonna del Piano animal inhumations thus could indicatethat the relationship between Iron Age Italians (individuals orgroups) and animals was predominantly magical. The very oldage of the Madonna del Piano ox, however, also might stress ataboo aspect: humans apparently did not dare to sacrifice cat-tle, but reverentially waited until they were dead. Nonetheless,though being a worshiped animal, the Madonna del Piano oxalso tells us that bulls were castrated relatively late in theirgrowth, as well as that they were used for heavy work. Thedifferent ritual behavior adopted for the ox and dog in this sitesuggests that the two animals had distinct symbolic signifi-cance for humans, but the Madonna del Piano sample doesnot reveal this secret.

Semitella and Madonna del Piano testify that late Neolithicand Bronze Age northern and eastern European practices pene-trated in Italy, but also that they persisted longer than in otherparts of Europe. Italy thus possibly formed a sort of culturalenclave within the Mediterranean area for some time.

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to express their gratitude to the Soprinten-denza Archeologica della Toscana and, in particular, to Dr.Elsa Pacciani for granting them access to the specimens. Manythanks to Dr. Giuliano De Marinis, Head of the Soprintenden-za Archeologica delle Marche for providing us precious infor-mation on the site, to Professor Fabio Martini for further dataon the inhumations and for his precious suggestions, and to Dr.Philippe Fernandez for critically reading and improving themanuscript. We wish to express our gratitude to Professor An-drea Martini, Professor Jacopo De Grossi Mazzorin and Dr.Elena Bedini for their invaluable assistance. The men of FireDepartment of Florence helped in moving the heaviest speci-mens. To all we are especially grateful. The work was finan-cially supported by MIUR funds.

References

Audoin-Rouzeau, F., 1991. La taille du Bœuf domestique en Europe de l’an-tiquité aux temps modernes. In: Desse, J., Desse-Berset, N. (Eds.), Fichesd’ostéologie animale pour l’archéologie. Série B : mammifères. Centre deRecherches Archéologiques du CNRS, Paris, pp. 1–40.

Banner, J., 1956. Die Péceler Kultur. Archaeologia Hungarica 25, 206–209.

rone, R., 1981. Anatomia comparata dei mammiferi domestici—Splacnolo-gia: apparato digerente, apparato respiratorio. Edagricole, Bologna 3, 1–710.rone, R., 1995. Anatomia comparata dei mammiferi domestici—Osteologia.Edagricole, Bologna 1, 1–690.rtosiewicz, L., 1995. Animal remains from the Avar period cemetery ofBudakalász-Dunapart. Acta Archaeologica Academiae Scientiarum Hun-garicae 47, 241–255.hrens, H., 1964. Die neolithisch-frühmetallzeitlichen Tierskelettfunde derAlten Welt. Studien zu ihrer Wesensdeutung und historischen Problematik.Veröffentlichungen des Landesmuseums für Vorgeschichte in Halle 19,Berlin.hrensmeyer, A.K., 1978. Taphonomic and ecological information frombone weathering. Paleobiology 4, 150–162.ford, L.R., 1981. Bones, ancient men and modern mythes. Studies in Ar-chaeology Academic Press Inc. Orlando, FL, 1–320.essneck, J., 1956. Ein Beitrag zur Errechnung der Widerristhöhe nach Me-tapodienmassen bei Rindern. Zeitschrift für Tierzüchtung und Züchtungs-bia 68, 75–90.könky, S., 1974. History of Domestic Mammals in Central and EasternEurope. Akadémiai Kiado, Budapest, 95–147.btree, P.J., 1995. The symbolic role of animals in Anglo-Saxon England:evidence from burials and cremations. In: Ryan, K., Crabtree, P.J. (Eds.),The Symbolic Role of Animals in Archaeology. University of Pennsylva-nia, Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology Research Papers inScience and Archaeology, MASCA 12, Philadelphia, pp. 20–26.Grossi Mazzorin, J., Minniti, C., 2000. Le sepolture di cani della necropolidi età imperiale di Fidene—Via Radicofani (Roma): alcune considerazionisul loro seppellimento nell’antichità. Atti del 2° Convegno nazionale diarcheozoologia Asti. Edizioni Abaco, Forlì, 387–398 – (14–16 novembre1997).Marinis, G., Salvini, M., 1999. Le testimonianze villanoviane. In: Martini,F., Poggesi, G., Sarti, L. (Eds.), Lunga memoria della Piana: l’area fioren-tina dalla preistoria alla romanizzazione, September 25, 1999–January 292000. Centro Stampa 2P, Firenze, pp. 73–80.ttrens, E., 1947. Les ossements de Bos taurus brachyceros Rutim. et deBos primigenius Boj. Revue Suisse de Zoologie 54, 459–544.esch, V.d.A., 1976. A Guide to the Measurement of Animal Bones fromArchaeological Sites. Bulletin of the Peabody Museum of Achaeology andEthnolology, Harvard University 1, 1–137.llus, S., 1940. A Magyar Nemezeti Museum néhány újabb ásatása. Archae-ologiai Értesitö 3, 1–140.ndert, O.F., 1953. Neolithische Gräber mit Rinderbeigaben und Rindbestat-tungen in Mitteleuropa. Congrès International des Sciences Préhistoriqueset Protohistoriques. Actes de la 3e Session, Zürich, 1–201.bermehl, V.H., 1961. Die Altersbestimmung bei Haustieren, Pelztieren undbeim jagdbaren Wild. Paul Parey, Berlin and Hamburg.udelka, F., 1885. Das Verhältnis der Ossa longa zur Skeletthöhe bei denSäugetieren. Verhandlungen Naturforschung Vereins Brünn 24, 127–153.uwe Kooijmans, L.P., 1974. The Rhine-Meuse Delta. Four studies on itsprehistoric occupation and Holocene geology. Analecta Praehistorica Lei-densia 7, 1–421.ning, J., 1996. Erneute Gedanken zur Benennung der neolithischen Period-en. Germania 74, 233–237.man, R.L., 1994. Vertebrate Taphonomy. Cambridge University Press,Cambridge, 1–524.ran, J., 1998. Die Badener Kultur und der ägäisch-anatolische Raum. Ger-mania 76, 497–525.rshall, L.G., 1989. Bone modification and “the laws of burial”. In: Bon-nichsen, R., Sorg, M.H. (Eds.), Bone Modification. University of MaineCenter for the Study of the First Americans. Orono, pp. 7–24.tolsci, J., 1970. Historische Erforschung der Korper grosse des Rindes aufGrund von ungarischem Knochenmaterial. Zeitschrift für Tierzüchtungund Züchtungsbiologie 87, 89–137.Cormick, F., 1991. The effect of the Anglo-Norman settlement on Ire-land’s wild and domesticated fauna. In: Crabtree, P.J., Ryan, K. (Eds.),Animal Use and Culture Change. University of Pennsylvania, Museum of

No

Plu

Po

Pra

Re

Re

San

Sar

Sch

Sco

Va

We

Zal

S. Cencetti et al. / Geobios 39 (2006) 328–336336

Archaeology and Anthropology Research Papers in Science and Archaeol-ogy, MASCA 8, Philadelphia, pp. 41–52.

bis, G., 1954. Ur-und Fruhgeschichtliche Rinder nord-und Mitteldeutsch-land. Zeitschrift für Tierzuchtung und Zuchtungsbiologie 63, 155–194.

g, I., 1987. An analysis of witchdoctor divining sets. Research by the Na-tional Cultural History and Open-Air Museum 1, 49–67.

llex, A., 1999. Comments on the interpretation of the so-called cattle bur-ials of Neolithic Centra Europe. Antiquity 73, 542–550.

nge, H.D., Anderson, J.F., Rahn, H., 1979. Scaling of skeletal mass tobody mass in birds and mammals American Naturalist 113, 103–122.

itz, E.J., Quitmyer, I.R., 1988. Faunal remains from two coastal GeorgiaSwift Creek sites. Southern Archaeology 7, 95–108.

itz, E.J., Wing, E.S., 1999. Zooarchaeology. Cambridge University Press,Cambridge 1–455.

dweiss, D.H., Wing, E.S., 1997. Ritual rodents: the guinea pigs ofChincha, Peru. Journal of Field Archaeology 24, 47–58.

ti, L., Anastasio, S., 2001. The ox grave from Semitella (Sesto Fiorentino,Firenze). Bell Beakers today, Riva del Garda 649–651.midt-Nielsen, K., 1984. Scaling: Why is Animal size so Important? Cam-bridge University Press, Cambridge 1–241.tt, K.M., 1990. Postcranial dimensions of ungulates as predictors of bodymass. In: Damuth, J., MacFadden, J.B. (Eds.), Body size in MammalianPaleobiology: Estimation and Biological Implications. Cambridge Univer-sity Press, Cambridge, pp. 301–335.n Valkenburgh, B., 1990. Skeletal and dental predictors of body mass incarnivores. In: Damuth, J., MacFadden, J.B. (Eds.), Body size in Mamma-lian Paleobiology: Estimation and Biological Implications. CambridgeUniversity Press, Cambridge, pp. 181–205.igelt, J., 1989. Recent vertebrate carcasses and their paleobiological impli-cations. University of Chicago Press, Chicago 1–188.kin, V.I., 1960. Metapodialia variation and its significance for the study ofancient horned cattle. Byulleten Moskovskogo Obshchestva IspytateleiPrirody Otdel Biologicheskii 65, 109–126 (in Russian).