jt-127TRIS - Journal Of Taphonomy

P R O ME T H E US P R E S S / P A L A E O N T O L O G I C A L N E T W O R K F O UN D A T I O N
Journal of Taphonomy
(TERUEL)
2012
Available online at www.journaltaphonomy.com
Horwitz et al.
VOLUME 10 (ISSUE 2)
Recent Indian Porcupine (Hystrix indica)
Burrows and their Impact on Ancient Faunal
and Human Remains: A Case Study from
Tel Zahara (Israel)
Liora Kolska Horwitz*
National Natural History Collections, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Israel
Susan L. Cohen
Department of History and Philosophy, Montana State University, Bozeman, MT, USA
Wieslaw Więckowski
Department of Bioarchaeology, Warsaw University, Poland
Henk K. Mienis
National Natural History Collections, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Israel
Jill Baker
Independent Scholar, 4027 Pine Tree Drive, Miami, Fl. 33140, USA
Emilia Jastrzebska
Department of Bioarchaeology, Warsaw University, Poland
Journal of Taphonomy 10 (2) (2012), 85-112.
Manuscript received 8 May 2012, revised manuscript accepted 8 March 2013.
It has long been known that porcupines accumulate and modify bones, but few actualistic studies on the
contents of porcupine burrows have been undertaken. Here we present the results of an investigation of
recent Indian porcupine (Hystrix indica) burrows that riddle the archaeological site of Tel Zahara
(Israel). Faunal remains were recovered from the den entrances and inside a burrow system that we
excavated. Bones exhibiting typical porcupine gnaw-damage i.e., flat-bottomed parallel grooves, were
recovered from all dens, but no clear porcupine damage was evident on human osteological remains that
were encountered by the porcupines during excavation of their dens. The surface patina of many of the
bones is dark, signifying long-term burial, and is probably indicative of their archaeological origin.
Article JTa127. All rights reserved.
*E-mail: [email protected]
85
Indian porcupine taphonomy
Porcupine gnawed areas on these bones are lighter in colour and so post-date the patina. Compared to
the Roman period deposits on the tel, the den assemblage contains significantly higher numbers of wild
taxa, a lower proportion of large-sized taxa, but a similar proportion of bones of medium-sized taxa,
suggesting preferential selection of smaller-sized bones. Both tel and den deposits comprise similar
frequencies of burnt bones and body part breakdowns are alike. As expected, higher frequencies of
rodent and carnivore gnawed bones were found in the den samples. The results suggest that the porcupine
burrow sample is a selected sub-set of the Roman faunal assemblage from the tel. This study has led us to
conclude that the Indian porcupine plays a significant role as an agent of bioturbation of archaeological
sediments and also as a collector and modifier of bones.
Keywords: Hystrix indica, NEAR EAST, TEL ZAHARA, PORCUPINE BURROWS BONE DAMAGE,
BIOTURBATION
rats and porcupines, are known to practice
‘osteophagia’ or bone consumption (Maguire,
1976; Brain, 1980, 1981; Brett, 1991; Haglund,
1992; Haglund et al., 1988; Klippel &
Synstelien, 2007; Rabinovich, 1987; Rabinovich
& Horwitz, 1994; Thornton & Fee, 2001;
Kibii, 2009). This practice is thought to meet
their calcium and phosphorus demands but
also to sharpen their incisors, which continue
to grow throughout life (Brain, 1980, 1981;
Duthie & Skinner, 1986; Rabinovich &
Horwitz, 1994). Although it is claimed that
for this purpose rodents preferentially select
dry, weathered bones (Brain, 1980; Gifford,
1981), there is extensive evidence to indicate
that omnivorous rodents do consume soft
tissue, which may result in damage to the
associated bones (Haglund, 1992, 1997;
Klippel & Synstelien, 2007; Rabinovich,
1987; Ropohl et al., 1995; Tsokos et al.,
1999).
Rodent damage to bones (or plants)
is caused by the pincer movement of the
upper and lower incisors. In most cases the
upper incisors hold the bone steady, while
the chisel-shaped incisors of the lower jaw
are free to move (Haglund, 1997), while it is
also common for both the upper and lower
incisors to drag across the bone simultaneously,
converging on a point. Since these teeth are
Introduction
It is well documented that burrowing animals
disturb archaeological deposits (e.g. Blackham,
2000; Bocek, 1986; Erlandson, 1984; Fowler
et al., 2004; Johnson, 1989; Pierce, 1992;
Wood & Johnson, 1978). These and numerous
other studies demonstrate that burrowing
activity may result in: (a) the introduction
of modern material, (b) vertical and horizontal
mixing of archaeological material, (c) sizesorting of artifacts, (d) destruction of architectural/
sedimentary features, (e) destruction of, or
damage to, objects, and (f) burrowing animals
functioning as ‘ecosystem engineers’ by
causing physical state changes in biotic or
abiotic materials and so modify and/or
create microhabitats (Wilby et al., 2001).
Rodents, such as porcupines, are
especially attracted to archaeological sites due
to the presence of food debris and also since the
archaeological sediments are often less densely
packed than those of the surrounding area,
making them eminently suitable for burrowing.
Indeed, this form of disturbance is so common
in archaeological sites that Butzer (1982)
coined the term “rodenturbation”. Though
rodents primarily consume subterranean and
above-ground plant parts, a broad spectrum
of species, such as squirrels, beavers, mice,
86
Horwitz et al.
Figure 1. Bones recovered from the Tel Zahara Indian porcupine burrows showing typical striae or grooves that form
crenellations resulting from porcupine gnawing. A: Unidentified bone shaft fragment Tel Zahara NW B6; B and C:
damage on a large mammal femur shaft from Tel Zahara burrow NW B6. (scale: each block = 1 mm).
paired, damage typically takes the form of
parallel, quite broad but shallow, flatbottomed striae or grooves that form a
crenellated pattern (Brain, 1981; Haglund,
1992, 1997; Klippel & Synstelien, 2007;
Rabinovich & Horwitz, 1994) (Figure 1A-C).
Damage patterns are, however, variable and
may be fan-shaped, crisscross or random,
while not all marks left by rodents conform
to the parallel striation pattern attributed to
rodents. (Shipman & Rose, 1988; Klippel &
Synstelien, 2007). Rodent-damaged areas on
bones are usually located where there is thick
cortical bone, such as on the edges of bones
or on jutting protuberances. These areas may
also be chosen since they are more easily
accessible to rodents which have a limited
jaw gape. However, Klippel and Synstelien
(2007) demonstrated that the brown rat
(Rattus norvegicus) preferentially attacked
areas where the cortical bone was thinnest
in order to gain access to the grease-rich
cancellous bone, demonstrating consumption
of fresh rather than dry bones. In this regard,
Haglund (Haglund, 1992; Haglund et al., 1988)
noted that in gnawed bones where the bone
is thin, typical rodent striae may be absent.
As for carnivores (e.g. Domínguez-Rodrigo &
Piqueras, 2003), the size class of the rodent
responsible for marks should be correlated with
the size of the grooves made by their incisors.
Haglund (1992) discussed how rodents
may contribute to the transport/movement
of bones. Indeed, porcupine osteophagia may
result in the accumulation of, as well as
damage to, large piles of bones in their burrows
as documented by several researchers for
the Cape porcupine, Hystrix africaeaustralis
(Alexander, 1956; Maguire, 1976; Maguire
et al., 1980; Brain, 1980, 1981; O’Regan et
87
Indian porcupine taphonomy
al., 2011) At the site of Tel Fendi (Jordan),
almost directly across the Jordan River from
Tel Zahara, Blackham (2000) documented
the impact of burrowing activities of the
Palestine mole-rat (Spalax ehrenbergi) on
archaeological remains and concluded that
mole-rat activity may account for the high
fragmentation and poor preservation of bone
at this as well as other Levant sites.
The Indian porcupine is a large rodent
with adult body masses ranging from 10-15
kg. As such it was not surprising that in
experiments carried out on captive animals
in Israel it was demonstrated that they not
only readily gnawed bones and wood, but
often totally destroyed them (Rabinovich &
Horwitz, 1994). Mendelssohn and Yom-Tov
(1999:395) accepted that the Indian porcupine
is a modifier of bones but proposed that this
species does not introduce lining material or
food into its burrow, suggesting that the
Indian porcupine may not accumulate bones
in their burrows.
The current study focuses on this
question through an actualistic study of
modern porcupine burrows located on the
archaeological site of Tel Zahara in the
Jordan Valley, Israel. The study examined
animal and human bones recovered from the
entrance area of several porcupine burrows
located on the surface of the mound, as well
as material found during excavation of a
burrow system on the same mound.
Background
Tel Zahara, a small mound (ca. 25 hectares
in extent) is located ca. 5km west of the
town of Beth Shean at the confluence of the
Figure 2. Map showing location of Tel Zahara and other
locations mentioned in the text.
88
Horwitz et al.
Figure 3. Map showing the location of each porcupine burrow and its number.
Listing of burrow entrances with their elevation (m.a.s.l.):
Western part of the Tel:
SW–B1 (elev. Top = 97.01, Bottom = 95.85) – the burrow had human remains, not active, the entrance roof collapsed
leaving almost a vertical shaft.
SW–B2 (elev. Top = 96.19, Bottom = 96.49) – the burrow had human remains, probably still active as shown by
footprints.
SW–B3 (elev. Top = 96.03, Bottom = 95.33) – the burrow was not examined.
SW– B4 (elev. Top = 96.68, Bottom = 95.96) – no human remains.
Northern part of the Tel:
NW–B5 (elev. Top = 99.09, Bottom = 98.55) – no human remains.
NW–B6 (elev. Top = 99.53, Bottom = 99.03) – human remains, at least two individuals (child, and an adult – the last
exposed inside the den, in the roof – two human leg bones visible).
NE–B7 (elev. Top = 99.11, Bottom = 98.53) – human remains present.
NE–B8 (elev. Top = 99.48, Bottom = 98.85) – human remains nearby, has a double entrance.
89
Indian porcupine taphonomy
Figure 4. Tel Zahara. Left: Indian porcupine burrow entrances on Tel Zahara each marked by a person (A) burrows in the southwest (B) burrows in the
northwest. Right: Examples of burrow entrances.
90
Figure 5. Tel Rehov. Arrows indicate (A) Indian porcupine burrow entrances on the tel surface (B) Porcupine burrows in a standing section on-site.
Horwitz et al.
91
Indian porcupine taphonomy
Jezreel and Jordan Valleys, on the south
bank of Wadi Harod (Figure 2). On the
surface of the tel is a historical Muslim
cemetery which overlies and in places, cuts
into, a Roman period farmhouse and
associated structures (dating to the 1st–3rd
centuries AD), which probably served as a
satellite to the larger Roman city at Beth
Shean (Scythopolis) during this era. The
Roman material represents the bulk of the
finds, while beneath it are deposits dating to
the Hellenistic, Iron Age III/Persian, Middle
Bronze Age II and Early Bronze Age periods
(Cohen, in press; Cohen & Więckowski,
2007).
During excavations and surveys on
the tel, the excavators were struck by the
abundance of modern burrow entrances that
dotted the surface. The burrows were located
primarily on the top and upper slopes of the
mound, especially on the western side
(Figures 3, 4A). The burrows evident on the
surface were identified as belonging to the
Indian porcupine (Hystrix indica) due to
size of the entrances, presence of porcupine
quills, faeces and footprints at the entrance
to some of the burrows, as well as reports of
sightings of porcupine on the tel, going back
at least two decades, by members of Kibbutz
Nir David, on whose agricultural land the
mound sits.
While the archaeological excavations
were located in areas distant from the
burrow entrances, encountering the results
of porcupine and other animal activities at
the site was unavoidable (Figure 4). The
burrows often resulted in contaminated loci;
the tunneling sometimes caused later ceramic
material to be found in earlier levels or cut
through archaeological features. As illustrated
in Appendix A, a significant amount of
archaeological material, spanning all periods
represented on the tel, was recovered from
the Indian porcupine burrows that we excavated
(see below). Numerous porcupine burrows
also dot the surface of the neighbouring
archaeological site of Tel Rehov, located
some 5 km south of Bet Shean (Figure 5). Here,
too, there is clear evidence for subterranean
penetration of porcupine burrows deep into
the archaeological deposits, indicating that
porcupine disturbance to archaeological
sites in this region may be an important
taphonomic factor.
In northern Israel, burrowing rodents
constitute a high percentage of the local
mammalian fauna (Mendelssohn & Yom-Tov,
1999). Of the common burrowing species,
perhaps the most prodigious are the Indian
porcupine, the Palestine mole-rat (Spalax
ehrenbergi), Wagner’s gerbil (Gerbillus
dasyurus) and Tristram’s jird (Meriones
tristrami). Compared to those of other
burrowing taxa in the region, gerbil burrows
are relatively shallow (ca. 30-40 cm deep or
slightly more), have several openings with a
resting chamber and with a nest at the end
of one of the tunnels. The burrow of the
Palestine mole-rat is a closed tunnel system
that may span up to 39 m in length in winter,
is the width of the animal’s body and ranges in
depth from 10-40 cm in winter to as deep as
1.5 m in summer (Mendelssohn & Yom-Tov,
1999). The Palestine mole-rat has been shown
to have the ability to assess the dimensions,
density and relative distance of an obstacle
encountered underground and then to select
the most suitable digging strategy to bypass
it (Kimchi et al., 2005), a factor which may
account for the irregular nature of their tunnels
in archaeological sites.
Indian porcupine burrows can be 15 m
or longer and have one or more openings ca.
30 cm high and 40 cm wide (Mendelssohn
& Yom-Tov, 1999). The tunnel width fits
that of the animal and has a large chamber at
92
Horwitz et al.
the far end. The burrows are often excavated
under rocks, which then serve as the den’s
roof or else are located inside natural caves.
Within their territory there is a permanent
burrow as well as several others which may
be used in times of danger. They usually live
in pairs and use the burrows for hiding in
during the day (since they are nocturnal) as
well as for breeding. Newborn porcupines are
weaned at 3 months but nibble food within
several days of being born. In Israel, as
elsewhere in the world, the density of
porcupines varies primarily according to food
availability. For example, Indian porcupines
in the Negev desert occur in densities of 2.1
animals/km2 (Alkon, 1999), while on the
Mediterranean coastal plain their densities
are higher, at 4 animals/km2 (Server &
Mendelssohn, 1991). Indian crested porcupines
utilizing potato crops in the Negev desert
(i.e., a locality with artificially high food
availability) attained even higher densities
of ca. 7.5 animals/km2 (Alkon, 1999). The
fact that Tel Zahara is surrounded by
agricultural fields increases the likelihood
of a relatively high density of porcupines.
This factor may also have contributed to
increased porcupine density around tel sites
when they were occupied in the past.
instances old footprints of porcupines were
visible leading into the burrows. Each burrow
entrance was given a unique number, and all
items of material culture (Appendix A), as
well as the organic remains (plants, bones,
molluscs, quills and faeces; Figure 6, Appendix
B) that were littering the surface adjacent to
the entrance were hand collected for analysis
and superficial soil deposit adjacent to the
burrow entrances sifted using a 5mm mesh.
Among the bone samples, both human and
animal remains were identified (Figure 7).
This material represents items collected/
transported to the burrows by porcupines or
other animals inhabiting them, or items
encountered by the porcupines while digging
the burrows and in some instances were
brought by them to the surface.
In addition to the surface collections,
a small excavation was undertaken of two
adjacent burrow entrances, B6 and B8. The
primary objectives were: (a) to map the
extent and contour of this part of the burrow
system and see if the entrances of B6 and
B8 met as well as to and locate the burrow
chamber; (b) to investigate the burrow
contents. In this regard, of primary interest
was whether the porcupines had introduced
bones into their burrows for gnawing or not.
All items recovered from the burrow
entrances and inside the burrows were examined.
The bones collected from the entrance areas
of six burrows, from the excavated area between
B6 and B8, and from the burrow chamber B6,
were identified to species and skeletal element
wherever possible. Where it was not possible
to identify the species, bones were placed in
size classes: medium mammal = sheep/goat
sized, large mammal=cattle sized. In addition,
both identified bones and fragments were
measured using a vernier caliper. Length was
taken along the long axis of the bone and
represented the maximum dimension, width
Methods
In the summer of 2009, a total of 10 burrow
entrances were located during a surface survey
of Tel Zahara. They were concentrated on the
NW and SW aspects of the mound (Figures 3,
4). However, given the dense vegetation cover
on the tel, it is likely that more burrow
openings were overlooked by our survey
team. At the time of our survey, some of the
burrow entrances appeared to be disused, as
they were overgrown with vegetation. In some
93
Indian porcupine taphonomy
Figure 6. Typical bone assemblage from the surface in front of a burrow entrance. Tel Zahara, burrow B5. Scale in mm.
94
Horwitz et al.
Figure 7. A: Photograph showing the roof of the main chamber of burrow B6 containing embedded human tibiae from
an overlying grave. Note that the epiphyses of both bones are missing, possibly gnawed by porcupines and also the presence of
vegetation (bottom left corner) on the chamber floor. B: Den entrance B1 with bleached human femur lying adjacent
to it.
95
Indian porcupine taphonomy
was the maximum dimension perpendicular
to length and depth was the maximum
thickness of the piece.
The state of weathering (W) of the
surface of each animal bone was recorded
using scores loosely based on Behrensmeyer
(1978) where: 0= not weathered; 1= slight
roughness/pitting of bone surface; 2= exfoliation,
root damage; 3= fissures, cracks. This was
undertaken in order to ascertain whether the
bones were fresh, had been exposed on the
landscape for some time, or had been rapidly
buried. The surface of all animal and human
bones recovered from the burrow entrances
and inside the burrows (i.e., recovered during
the excavation of the burrows) were examined
using a magnifying glass (10x) for evidence
of damage. The type and location of surface
modifications were identified and recorded.
They included cut marks, burning, rodent
gnawing and carnivore damage (Binford,
1981; Brain, 1981; Lyman, 1994).
The porcupine den assemblage was
compared to the faunal assemblage from the
Roman period recovered from Tel Zahara.
Non-paramateric tests (chi square and
contingency tests) were used to test for
statistical differences between them using
the PAST 2.14 program (Hammer et al., 2001).
burrow (the head lay towards the west). In
the west, the burrow was cut by the trench,
showing the large inner chamber. In the roof
of the chamber, two human leg bones
(tibiae) were embedded, indicating that the
burrow was excavated underneath a grave
(Figure 7A).
The burrow has a complex plan. The
western entrance leads to the actual burrow
chamber that opens ca. 1 m from it to the
south. There is a corridor leading southeast
which slopes downwards, that after ca. 1 m
starts to climb up and connect with the sloping
floor of the corridor leading downwards and
westwards from the eastern entrance. This
corridor divides into two. One corridor
leads off to the southwest (leading to the
burrow chamber), and one corridor goes north,
most probably connecting with entrance B7.
There is one more corridor going north that
leads to a dead end but most probably
connects with the corridor between B7 and
B8. There is a Roman or Byzantine wall in
the middle of this system. It seems that this
is the reason why the corridor leading from
B6 through the burrow to B8 dips down and
curves in order to connect with the corridor
leading down from B8. It is not clear if the
second entrance of B8 is part of that system
or not.
Burrow Excavation
Results
As part of the investigation of the porcupine
burrows on the tel, a trench was dug (length
= 6.50 m, width = ca. 1.00 m, depth [the
deepest part] = ca. 1.30 m (Figure 8). All
soil removed during excavation was sifted
using a 5 mm mesh.
About 1 m from the eastern entrance
of B6, a child’s burial, part of the historical
Muslim cemetery, was found in the section,
ca. 60 cm below the topsoil, right above the
Animal Remains
Only seven of the 10 burrow entrances
located during our survey yielded bone
remains. A total of 86 faunal items were
recovered from the burrow entrances, from
the excavation between B6 and B8, and
inside the burrow system of B6. The largest
assemblage was from the entrance of B8
96
Horwitz et al.
Figure 8. Section drawings of excavated Indian porcupine burrow system on the tel, showing relationship between
burrow entrances. A: South section. B: North section.
Key. B = burrow numbers in circles; 1 – disturbed top layer (with plant roots); 2 – top layer (probably natural
accumulation); 3 – remains of the stone walls.
Figure 9. Frequency of weathering stages for each Indian porcupine burrow. (W0= least weathering and W2= most).
97
Indian porcupine taphonomy
(N=31, 36.0% of the sample collected),
followed by B6 (N=17, 19.7% of the
sample). Only three bones were recovered
inside the burrow system of B6 (at distances
of 1 m and 1.5 m from the entrance), and a
further seven bones were found during the
excavation to connect burrows B6 and B8.
Although it is not possible to determine
whether the bones from inside the burrow
complex and chamber were intentionally
introduced by the porcupines or were
accidentally encountered by the animals
while digging, the fact is that they do
exhibit characteristic porcupine damage
(Figure 1). This conclusively demonstrates
that the Indian porcupine does indeed gnaw
bones inside its burrow, although we are
unable unequivocally to counter the claim
by Mendelssohn and Yom-Tov (1999) that
this species does not collect bones in its
dens.
It is difficult to know the number of
animals or lifespan of the Zahara dens that
have led to these accumulations. For the
Cape porcupine, Brain (1981:114) found
that over a period of 12 years, 380 objects
(including bones, wood, stones and others)
were introduced into the Nossob den
(Kalahari), while over the period of a year,
57 objects (of which 44 were bones) were
introduced into the Hartebeesthoek den,
located close to the city of Johannesburg. It
should be noted that for the Cape porcupine
only material from inside the den was
examined, while in this study material we
have included material from the burrow
entrances as well.
The frequency of different types of
weathering observed on the bones from the
Zahara burrows is given in Figure 9
compared to weathering frequencies on
bones from the Roman deposits on the tel
(Figure 10; Horwitz, in press). It is evident
that none of the bones associated with the
burrows were very weathered (W3), i.e.,
exposed on the mound’s surface for a long
time, with the majority either showing no
weathering at all (W0) or only slight
Table 1. Animal remains from the burrows and the Roman deposits on the Tel – Identified
versus Unidentified remains (Numbers of Bones and %).
Den #
SW B2
SW B4
NW B5
NW B6
Inside B6
SE B7
SE B8
Between B6 & B8
Total Den N (%)
Roman Tel Fauna N (%)
Identified
Bone
5
4
8
9
2
2
19*
4
53
(61.6%)
Unidentified
Bone
3
1
5
8
1
0
12
3
33
(38.4%)
Total
249
(65.4%)
132
(34.6 %)
381
* two are worked bones
98
8
5
12
17
3
2
30
7
86
Horwitz et al.
Table 2. Animal species representation for each Indian porcupine burrow and Roman deposits on the Tel.
SPECIES
SW
B1
Sheep
(Ovis aries)
Goat
(Capra hircus)
Sheep/Goat
(Ovis aries/
Capra hircus)
Cattle
(Bos taurus)
Pig
(Sus scrofa)
Donkey
(Equus asinus)
Canid cf. Dog
(Canis cf.
familiaris)
Fallow deer
(Dama dama
mesopotamica)
SW
B2
N
SW
B4
N
NW
B5
N
1
Indian Porcupine Burrows
NW
Inside
SE
SE
B6
B6
B7
B8
N
N
N
N
1
1
3
1
4
1
1
1
*
Between
B6 & B8
N
1
N
1
%
1.1
%
6
1
4
4.6
2
11
12.7
41
3
3.4
14
1
1.1
12
2
1
1
TOTAL
2
1
1
1.1
0.5
Gazelle cf. Mountain
0.5
(Gazella cf.
gazella)
Indian porcupine
(Hystrix indica)
Indian porcupine
quills
Indian porcupine
faeces
Micro-mammal
(Rodentia)
Unid. Medium
mammal
Unid. Large
mammal
Bird
(Aves)
Reptile
(Reptilia)
Fish
(Pisces)
Freshwater crab
(Potamon
fluviatalis)
TOTAL N**
2
1
1
1
6
7
4
X
X
3
1
5
9
2
2
1
1
X
8
5
13
3
2
22.0
-
X
-
2
49
56.9
9
2
7
8.1
7
1
1
1.1
2.5
2
2
2.3
-
1
1.1
-
2
2.3
1
86
100
249
22
31
7
*Tel Roman Fauna; **does not include porcupine quills, faeces or bone artifacts; X, present.
99
19
X
1
17
-
-
1
1
1.1
X
X
6
1
Indian porcupine taphonomy
Figure 10. Frequency of weathering stages for Roman levels on the tel. (W0= least weathering and W2= most).
weathering (W1). This pattern is most
evident in the two burrows with the highest
numbers of animal bones, burrows B6 and
B8. The small size of some of the bone
samples has in some instances biased the
results. For example, of the three bones
found inside B6, two were quite heavily
weathered (W2), resulting in a noticeable
peak in this weathering stage. Likewise,
both bones recovered from burrow B7 were
well-preserved, resulting in a peak in stage
W0. Overall, the extent and pattern of surface
weathering observed on the fauna recovered
from the burrows resembles that found on
bones deriving from the archaeological
deposits at Tel Zahara, and when tested
statistically were found to be non-significant.
Although the tel sample contains a handful
of more severely weathered specimens
(W3), the majority, like those from the
burrows, fell into weathering stages W0 and
W1, suggesting a similar burial history.
The archaeological bones from the
Roman deposits and the majority of porcupine
den remains are stained with a dark patina,
probably the result of their long-term burial.
However, where the den bones have been
gnawed by porcupines, they reveal lightercoloured bone underlying the patina (e.g.,
Figures 1, 12). This indicates that the porcupine
damage was more recent than the bones
modified, and that these had probably been
buried for some time, probably deriving
from the archaeological deposits.
As shown in Table 1, the majority of
animal remains from the burrows were
identifiable to species or size class, and this
follows a similar trend to bones derived
from the Roman levels on the tel. The species
found in these two faunal assemblages are
given in Table 2. Chi square and contingency
table tests were used to compare the
proportions of wild versus domestic species
in the den and tel samples. Significant
differences were between them, with more wild
taxa in the den sample than in the tel (P < 0.000).
The latter class includes reptiles, micromammals, crustacean etc. many of which
100
Horwitz et al.
Figure 11. Left: Carnivore damage on cattle vertebral
centrum showing v-shaped notches where bone has
been gouged out (solid arrows) and a carnivore puncture
hole from a canine (circle). Recovered between Burrows
B6 and B8. Scale in mm.
Right: From inside burrow NW B6, cattle left distal
humerus with (a) gnaw damage on the distal end (open
arrows) probably from a porcupine; (b) butchery damage
(chop and cut marks) on the proximal end of the shaft
(solid arrows), Scale in mm.
Figure 12. Tel Zahara burrow NW B6, Large mammal femur shaft showing porcupine damage (A) light coloured
crenellated striae and adjacent pits which have penetrated the darker archaeological patina of the bone (solid arrow); (B)
a light coloured patch of stripped/whittled bone (in circle); (C) an uneven, gnawed bone edge (open arrow); (D) random
gnaw striae on bone shaft (open arrow). Scale in mm.
101
Indian porcupine taphonomy
Table 3a. Skeletal element breakdown for all taxa (a) found in burrows (pooled).
Unidentified
Upper
Lower
Upper
Lower
Total
Feet
Fragments
Burrows
Cranial
Forelimb
Forelimb
Hindlimb
Hindlimb
Trunk
N
SW B2
1
1
1
2
5
3
SW B4
1
1
1
3
2
NW B5
2
2
1
2
7
5
NW B6
2
2
2
3
9
8
Inside B6
1
1
2
1
SE B7
1
1
2
SE B8
4
2
2
1
7
1
17
13
Between B6
2
1
1
4
3
& B8
TOTAL N
12
8
2
7
3
16
1
49
35
24.4
16.3
4.0
14.2
6.1
32.6
2.0
%
(Note: counts in this table do not include numbers of porcupine quills, faeces or freshwater crab chelipods, nor the two bone artifacts
from B8)
Sheep/Goat
(Ovis/Capra)
31.4
13.8
5.5
4.6
12.9
21.2
10.1
108
Cattle
(Bos)
42.4
15.1
0
6.0
9.0
21.2
6.0
33
Pig
(Sus)
40.0
13.3
3.3
6.6
6.6
30.0
0
30
Table 3b. Body part breakdown (%) for three main taxa found in Roman levels on the Tel.
Cranial
Upper Forelimb
Lower Forelimb
Upper Hindlimb
Lower Hindlimb
Trunk
Feet
Total N
Key: Cranial: skull, antler, horn, maxilla, mandible and loose teeth. Forelimb: scapula, humerus, radius, ulna, proximal metacarpal, carpals.
Hindlimb: pelvis, femur, tibia, patella, calcaneum, astragalus, proximal metatarsal, tarsals. Thoracic Region: atlas, axis vertebrae, cervical,
thoracic, lumbar and caudal vertebrae. Feet: 1st, 2nd and 3rd phalanges
102
22
(40.7%)
Roman Tel Fauna N
-
103
calcaneum
Right tibia & fibula
Left and right humeri, left and right
radii, left and right ulnae, left and
right femora, tibia
metatarsal
adult
adult
child 3-4 years
Between
B6 & B8
adult
rib
radius
SW B4
B6 Inside
den
B6 Inside
den
SE B7
SE B8
<18
adolescent
years
child
adult
SW B2
Left and right humeri, radius, ulna,
left and right femora, ribs, phalanges,
pelvis
distal humerus
adult
SW B1
Skeletal Element
Age of
Individual
Burrow
-
6
13.6
17
(31.4%)
4
9.0
3
Cut
1
-
6
13.6
1
1
Bleached
4
Bleached on one aspect indicating that it was exposed on the surface for
some time.
Edges on both the distal and proximal ends are broken/gnawed
Distal shaft – uneven break; fibula is missing proximal end
The long bones are missing at least one epiphysis
6
(11.1%)
2
4.5
2
Worked
Bone (tools)
Bleached on one aspect.
Two small pits on the distal shaft end
Possible gnawed edges, puncture hole adjacent to one edge
No epiphyseal ends.
Two small tooth pits adjacent to end of shaft – carnivore.
Half the bone is gone-broken/gnawed
In all bones the edges are broken/gnawed.
The long bones are missing at least one epiphysis
Damage Description
9
(16.6%)
4
1
7
15.9
5
2
1
5
11.3
Burnt
1
1
1
V-shaped
Notch
2
Tooth
Punctures
Table 5. Listing of modifications observed on human remains.
(%)
Rodent
Gnawed
1
1
3
3
1
1
3
1
14
31.8
Den #
SW B2
SW B4
NW B5
NW B6
Inside B6
SE B7
SE B8
Between B6 & B8
TOTAL DEN N
%
Table 4. Damage to bones from Indian porcupine burrows and the Roman period tel deposits (Numbers of Bones and %).
Horwitz et al.
Indian porcupine taphonomy
may be natural mortalities in the dens.
Furthermore, when species from the two
samples were grouped into size classes (large,
medium, small), they too differed significantly
(P<0.000), with markedly fewer large-sized
taxa and more smaller-sized taxa in the den
sample than in the tel assemblage. The
difference between the two samples was not
marked in the medium-sized category,
reflecting similar proportions of the most
common domestic taxa - sheep (Ovis aries),
goat (Capra hircus) and to a lesser extent,
pig (Sus scrofa). Domestic pigs are not
raised in the region around the mound today
and were not kept historically in this area
except for the Roman period, when pork
consumption peaked in the region (Horwitz
& Studer, 2005). As such, they most likely
derive from the Roman levels on the tel.
The skeletal remains of reptiles, porcupine
and micro-mammals, that undoubtedly
represent natural mortalities of local animals
inhabiting the tel and its environs, occur
only in the burrow samples and are absent
in the archaeological assemblage from the
tel. Their fresh state of preservation supports
their recent origin.
The skeletal element breakdown for
all taxa combined is given in Table 3. The 49
bones identified to skeletal element cover
the full range of body parts, with the majority
representing thoracic (32.6%) or cranial
elements (24.4%). Foot bones are the least
common. Statistical tests showed there to be
no significant differences in body part
representation between the porcupine den
sample when compared to the Roman period
tel sample of caprines, cattle and pigs,
respectively (Table 3). This may indicate
that the burrow assemblage fauna originates
from the archaeological deposits.
Statistical tests carried out on the
different types of modifications (Table 4)
indicates some significant differences between
the den sample and that from the tel
(P<0.004). The tel sample has a far higher
frequency of butchered (cut) bones than the
burrow sample (31.4% on the tel compared
to 9.0% for the burrows- Figure 11b), while
as expected, a slightly lower frequency of bones
with animal-derived damage are found on the
tel (40.7%) compared to the burrows with
56.7% (pooled rodent and carnivore damage).
The burrow assemblage contains a similar
frequency of burnt remains to that found in
the Roman deposits in the tel; 16.6% in the
tel assemblage versus 15.9% for the burrows,
but bleached bones, resulting from exposure
on the surface, occurred only in the burrow
assemblages and not in the tel sample.
Rodent damage is slightly more common
in the burrow assemblages than carnivore
damage (Table 4). The latter is represented
by tooth puncture holes and v-shaped
notches (Figure 11a). It has not been
possible to ascertain the carnivore species
responsible, but the possible role of dogs
cannot be excluded. No unequivocal carnivore
damage was present on bones from the Roman
period archaeological layer (Horwitz, in press),
such that it unlikely that some or all of this
damage occurred in antiquity.
Finally, examination of the size (length,
breadth and thickness) of the bones occurring
in the different burrow samples shows that
they are similar in their mean dimensions
(Figure 13a-c), but show a very large size
range. Ranges for all burrows combined are:
length 8.5-122.9 mm; width 2.1-133.1 mm;
depth 1.0-66.2 mm. The material from the
excavated area between burrows B6 and B8
is the most variable, since it contains the
longest items. Mean bone length is shortest in
burrow B2. For bone breadth and thickness
the sample from inside burrow B6 is
exceptional since aside from two small bone
104
Horwitz et al.
fragments, this sample contains an almostcomplete cattle distal humerus with shaft
(Figure 11). As noted above, it is not known
if this large bone was introduced into the
burrow by a porcupine or else encountered
by the animal while digging its burrow. The
porcupine gnaw-damage on the distal
epiphysis of this bone is lighter-coloured
than the dark surface patina of the rest of
the bone (Figure 11a), indicating that the
bone was buried for some time prior to its
modification by porcupines and is probably
archaeological in origin. Burrows B6 and
B8 contained thicker and broader bones,
both in the entrance sample and material
from inside the burrows, than those of other
burrows studied.
To conclude, the metric data for the
burrow assemblages are on the whole
consistent. Looking at the maximum dimensions
of bones recovered from the burrows,
porcupines seem to have little trouble in
dealing with bones that are 123 mm long, 133
mm wide and 66mm thick, which is not
surprising given their relatively large size,
and the ease of access for gnawing exposed
bone margins on larger skeletal elements.
However, the size classes of taxa recovered
from the dens indicates a preference for medium
and small sized animals. Minimum bone size
in the den assemblages is quite small: 12 mm
long, 4 mm wide and 1 mm thick. It should be
borne in mind that the latter sizes may be the
end-result of gnawing on much larger bones,
given that porcupines have been documented
to destroy relatively large objects entirely
(Rabinovich & Horwitz, 1994).
Molluscs
The eight porcupine burrows yielded 186
terrestrial and freshwater molluscs (Appendix
B). Only six molluscs were found inside the
excavated porcupine burrow, and these
probably represent archaeological remains
or natural inclusions in the soil matrix
(Table 5). Seven taxa were identified
including freshwater and terrestrial species.
Of the seven recognized taxa, four are
freshwater species: Melanopsis buccinoidea,
Melanopsis cerithiopsis, other Melanopsis
sp. and Unio terminalis terminalis. The
Melanopsis species is most probably a
hybrid between M. buccinoidea and M.
cerithiopsis. The gastropods (Melanopsis
spp.) are still found in the waters of the
Harod Valley (Milstein et al., 2012). The
freshwater mussel (Unio), represented by a
single fragment, is still found in the nearby
Jordan River and the Sea of Galilee and so
most likely represents a local species rather
than an imported item of trade (Milstein et
al., 2012). It may have been introduced by
people or animals, such as birds.
The terrestrial mollusc fauna is
represented by three species: Monacha
obstructa, Xeropicta vestalis joppensis and
Helix engaddensis engaddensis. Also in this
case, all three species are still commonly
found in the Harod Valley (Heller, 2009).
The burrows yielded similar ranges of taxa,
although there were slightly more specimens
of Monacha and fewer Helix in the burrows
located to the SW than those in the NW
(B1-B4). A large part of the Melanopsis
shells (68.7%) show a damaged aperture.
This damage was most probably carried out
by the freshwater crab Potamon potamios,
which chips away the lip of the aperture
with its pincers in order to feed on the
snail's meat. Likewise, eight shells out of a
total of 72 belonging to Monacha obstructa
and five shells out of 25 belonging to
Xeropicta vestalis joppensis show traces of
predation by small mammals, either shrews
or rodents. These occur in both SW and NW
105
Indian porcupine taphonomy
assemblages. However, burnt shells were
only found in the excavated area between
B6 and B8 and probably relate to bush fires
on the mound. Any evidence that the land
snails and freshwater molluscs have been
exploited by humans or served as food for
porcupines is lacking.
Human Remains
Our survey of porcupine burrows on the tel
recovered human remains that originally
derived from historical graves lying close to
the site surface (Figure 7; Cohen &
Więckowski, 2007; Więckowski, in press).
At least seven individuals are represented.
These remains derive from burrows in the
southwestern and central part of the tel
(Figure 3) and in most instances were
isolated bones. Only in one case were the
human remains possibly in articulation: the
remains of a child from the entrance of
burrow B8, discovered while excavating the
trench to link the opening of burrow B8 and
burrow B6. Because of the limited horizontal
exposure of this excavation (a trench), it
was difficult to establish the precise nature
of this burial and whether the skeleton was
in anatomical position. Leg bones (tibiae)
belonging to an adult individual found in the
roof of burrow B6 (Figure 7a) were not examined
in detail, since it was not possible to extricate
them without destroying the den entirely.
The south-western group comprised:
B1: an accumulation of human bones retrieved
from the deposit outside and inside the
collapsed burrow. The identified bones were
several fragments of the vertebral column
(from the cervical, thoracic and lumbar parts),
a few rib fragments, part of the humerus and
radius diaphysis (left), part of the wing of
the ilium and two manual phalanges. The
morphology of the bones shows that they
may belong to the same adult individual,
suggesting that this represents a grave
disturbed by porcupine activity.
B2: an isolated bone retrieved from the deposit
in the entrance to the burrow. The bone was
identified as the distal part of humerus, with a
septal aperture present. The state of ossification
indicates it belonged to an individual likely
less than 18 years old.
B3: no human remains were associated with
this burrow.
B4: an isolated bone was retrieved from the
deposit at the entrance of the burrow
opening. It was identified as a small piece
of a rib from a child’s skeleton.
The central group comprised:
B5: no human remains associated with this
burrow.
B6 and B8: the bones were retrieved from
inside the trench excavated in order to join
entrances B6 and B8 of what appear to be
the same porcupine burrow. The bones
belonged to at least two individuals, an adult
and a child. The adult remains included a
metatarsal, a phalanx and a talus. The remains
of the child were found in the trench, right
above the burrow entrance leading from the
B8 entryway. They consisted of an almost
complete skeleton; the bone inventory lacks
only the right tibia and fibula, as well as the
lower part of the vertebral column. The
preserved teeth indicate the age at death was
3-4 years. No grave goods were found. From
the section orientation (Figure 8) it can be
assumed that originally this burial was on
an E-W axis, with the head towards west.
B7: the bones were retrieved from the
deposit at the entrance to the burrow. The
identified bones consist of a right tibia
missing the proximal end, a fragment of the
right fibula, a small rib fragment and small
106
Horwitz et al.
fragments possibly from the pelvis. All
likely belonged to the same adult individual,
indicating that this was probably a disturbed
burial.
Figure 13. Box plots of bone dimensions from the Indian
porcupine burrow assemblages at Tel Zahara. Outliers are
shown as stars (>1 specimen) or open circles (=1 specimen).
Burrow # Key: A= Burrow Entrance B2; B= Burrow Entrance
B4; C= Burrow Entrance B5; D= Burrow Entrance B6;
E= Inside Burrow B6; F= Burrow Entrance B7; G= Burrow
Entrance B8; H= Between Burrow Entrance B6 and B8.
Out of eight surveyed porcupine
burrows, only two did not yield any human
remains. One of them was located in the
southwestern group on the eastern slope of
the tel and one in the central group but also
at some distance from the burrows that have
yielded human remains. The excavations in
the trench between burrow openings B6 and
B8 showed that the burrows were located in
close proximity to the human burials. There
was one burial in the trench, right between
the two openings, and one possible in situ
burial visible in the roof of the burrow
chamber. While digging their dens, it is
evident that the porcupines exploited the
softer, less dense earth that had been
previously disturbed by the human burials
and so encountered and disturbed human
burials.
Some 90% of human bones examined
had no weathering (W0) and only 10% fell
in the slightly weathered category (W1).
Since the bones are all historical in age,
they lack the distinctive dark patina of the
more ancient animal bones from the Roman
deposits on the tel that have been buried for
a much longer time.
As illustrated in Table 6, the majority
of human long bones are missing their
epiphyseal ends. However, no typical rodent
gnaw marks were observed on any of the
human remains. This includes the two tibiae,
from an overlying grave, that were embedded
in the roof of burrow B6 (Figure 7). It is
however possible, that the thin cortical bone
covering the epiphyses of human long bones
has impeded the preservation of typical
porcupine gnaw marks as argued by Haglund
(Haglund, 1992; Haglund et al., 1988).
In at least two instances (B2 and
entrance sample from B6), small tooth pits
were observed adjacent to the broken/gnawed
edges of the bones, while typical carnivore
107
Indian porcupine taphonomy
puncture holes were found on the child rib
in B4 and another on an adult distal femur in
B1. Thus, the most parsimonious explanation
is that carnivores were responsible for most, if
not all, of the observed damage to the human
bones found on the mound surface. Given
the small size of most of the pits, a small
carnivore such as a cat, fox or even a small
dog was probably the agent of modification.
A larger puncture hole on a distal femur
found outside burrow B1 (Figure 13a, b)
suggests the activity of another larger
carnivore such as a jackal or large dog.
Conclusions
This study has demonstrated that the Indian
porcupine is a major taphonomic agent
responsible for bone modification and
bioturbation of deposits in Israeli tel sites.
Their burrowing and bone collection activities
are sources of major disturbance to archaeological
sediments, resulting in mixing and damage
to archaeological contexts and material.
Porcupine damage was evident on numerous
bones recovered from the entrances and
their burrow system, many of which may be
archaeological in origin based on their dark
patina. Thus, contrary to the claims of
Mendelssohn and Yom-Tov (1999), this
species appears to gnaw bones inside their
burrows, although it is unclear whether these
bones were intentionally introduced by the
porcupines into their dens or were accidentally
encountered during burrowing. Typical
porcupine gnawing was not identified on the
human remains from Tel Zahara. However,
their role as taphonomic agents responsible
for the destruction of the epiphyses of these
bones could not be entirely discounted. In
addition, graves, with their unconsolidated
sediments, may attract porcupines as locales
in which to dig their burrows, resulting in
the increased dispersion and destruction of
their contents. It is possible that in the past,
the presence of agricultural fields as well as
food refuse attracted porcupines and other
rodents to tels as it does today.
Acknowledgements
Funding for the Tel Zahara project was
provided by a grant to SC from Montana
State University. We wish to thank Kibbutz
Nir David for their logistical support and for
providing housing for the team; and Dr.
Charles Egeland and an anonymous reviewer
for their constructive comments which have
helped to improve the paper. Maps and
sections were drawn by J. Rosenberg and W.
Więckowski.
References
Alexander, A.J. (1956). Bone carrying by a porcupine.
South African Journal of Science, 52: 257-258.
Alkon, P.U. (1999). Microhabitat to landscape impacts:
crested porcupine digs in the Negev desert highlands.
Journal of Arid Environments, 41: 183-202.
Behrensmeyer, A.K. (1978). Taphonomic and ecologic
information from bone weathering. Paleobiology,
4: 150-162.
Binford, L.R. (1981). Bones: Ancient Men and Modern
Myths. Academic Press, New York.
Blackham, M. (2000). Distinguishing bioturbation and
trampling using pottery sherd measures, Tell Fendi,
Jordan. Geoarchaeology, 15: 469-497.
Bocek, B. (1986). Rodent ecology and burrowing behavior:
Predicted effects on archaeological site formation.
American Antiquity, 51: 589-603.
Butzer, K.W. (1982). Archaeology as Human Ecology:
Method and Theory for a Contextual Approach.
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Brain, C.K. (1980). Some criteria for the recognition of
bone-collecting agencies in African caves. In
(Behrensmeyer, A. K. & Hill, A.P., eds.) Fossils in
the Making: Vertebrate Taphonomy and Paleoecology.
Chicago: University of Chicago Press, pp. 108-130.
108
Horwitz et al.
Brain, C.K. (1981). The Hunters or the Hunted? An
Introduction to African Cave Taphonomy. University
Chicago Press, Chicago.
Brett, R. A. (1991). The ecology of naked mole-rat
colonies: Burrowing, food, and limiting factors. In
(Sherman, P.W., Jarvis, J.U.M. & Alexander, R.D.,
eds.) The Biology of the Naked Mole-Rat. Princeton,
NJ: Princeton University Press, pp. 137-184.
Cohen, S. (ed.) (in press). Excavations at Tel Zahara
(2006-2009): Final Report. The Hellenistic and
Roman Strata. Oxford: BAR International Series.
Cohen, S. & Więckowski, W. (2007). Short fieldwork
report: Tel Zahara (Israel), seasons 2006-2007.
Bioarchaeology of the Near East, 1: 68-72.
Domínguez-Rodrigo, M. & Piqueras, A. (2003). The
use of tooth pits to identify carnivore taxa in toothmarked archaeofaunas and their relevance to
reconstruct hominid carcass processing behaviours.
Journal of Archaeological Science, 25: 311-330.
Duthie, A.G. & Skinner, J.D. (1986). Osteophagia in
the Cape porcupine Hystrix africaeaustralis. South
African Journal of Zoology, 21: 316-318.
Erlandson, J.M. (1984). A case study in faunalturbation:
Delineating the effects of the burrowing pocket
gopher on the distribution of archaeological materials.
American Antiquity, 49: 785-790.
Fowler, K.D., Greenfield, H.J. & van Schalkwyk, L.O.
(2004). The effects of burrowing activity on
archaeological sites: Ndondondwane, South Africa.
Geoarchaeology, 19: 441-470.
Gifford, D.P. (1981). Taphonomy and paleoecology: A
critical review of archaeology’s sister disciplines. In
(Schiffer, M.B., ed.) Advances in Archaeological
Method and Theory, Vol. 4. New York: Academic
Press, pp. 365-438.
Haglund, W.D., Reay, D.T. & Swindler, D.R (1988).
Tooth mark artifacts and urvival of bones in animal
scavenged human skeletons. Journal of Forensic
Sciences, 33: 985-997.
Haglund, W.D. (1992). Contribution of rodents to
postmortem artifacts of bon and soft tissue. Journal
of Forensic Sciences, 37: 1459-1465.
Haglund, W.D. (1997). Rodents and human remains. In
(Haglund, W.D. & Sorg, M.H., eds.) Forensic
Taphonomy: The Postmortem Fate of Human Remains.
New York: CRC Press, pp. 405-414.
Hammer, Ø., Harper, D. & Ryan, P. (2001). PAST:
Paleontological Statistics Software Package for
Education and Data Analysis. Palaeontologia
Electronica, 4(1). http://palaeo-electronica.org/2001_1/
past/issue1_01.htm
Heller, J. (2009). Land Snails of the Land of Israel,
Natural History and a Field Guide. Pensoft, Sofia.
Horwitz, L.K. (in press). Fauna from the Roman strata.
In (Cohen, S., ed.) Excavations at Tel Zahara
(2006-2009): Final Report. The Hellenistic and
Roman Strata. Oxford: BAR International Series.
Horwitz, L.K. & Studer, J. (2005). Pig production and
exploitation during the Classical periods in the
Southern Levant. In (Buitenhuis, H., Choyke, A.M.,
Martin, L., Bartosiewicz, L. & Mashkour, M., eds.)
Archaeozoology of the Near East vol. VI.
Groningen: ARC-Publicaties 123, pp. 222-239.
Johnson, D.L. (1989). Subsurface stone lines, stone zones,
artifact-manuport layers, and biomantles produced
by bioturbation via pocket gophers (Thomomys bottae).
American Antiquity, 54: 370-389.
Klippel, W.E. & Synstelien, J.A. (2007). Rodents as
taphonomic agents: Bone gnawing by brown rats
and gray squirrels. Journal of Forensic Sciences,
52: 765-773.
Kibii, J.M. (2009). Taphonomic aspects of African
porcupines (Hystrix cristata) in the Kenyan
Highlands. Journal of Taphonomy, 7: 21-27.
Kimchi, T., Reshef, M. & Terkel, J. (2005). Evidence
for the use of reflected self-generated seismic waves
for spatial orientation in a blind subterranean mammal.
Journal of Experimental Biology, 208: 647-659.
Lyman, R.L. (1994). Vertebrate Taphonomy. Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge.
Maguire, J.M. (1976). A Taxonomic and Ecological
Study of the Living and Fossil Hystriceda with
Particular Reference to Southern Africa. Unpublished
PhD dissertation. University of the Witwatersrand..
Maguire, J.M., Pemberton, D. & Collett, M.H. (1980).
The Makapansgat limeworks grey breccia: hominids,
hyaenas, hystricids or hillwash? Palaeontologia
Africana, 23: 75-98.
Mendelssohn, H. & Yom-Tov, Y. (1999). Fauna
Palaestina: Mammalia of Israel. Israel Academy
of Sciences and Humanities, Jerusalem.
Milstein, D., Mienis, H.K. & Rittner, O. (2012). A Field
Guide to the Molluscs of Inland Waters of the Land
of Israel. Nature and Parks Authority, Jerusalem
(in Hebrew).
O’Regan, H.J., Kuman, K. & Clark, R. (2011). The
likely accumulators of bones: Five Cape porcupine
den assemblages and the role of porcupines in the
post-Member 6 infill at Sterkfontein, South Africa.
Journal of Taphonomy, 9 (2): 69-87.
Pierce, C.D. (1992). Effects of pocket gopher burrowing
on archaeological deposits: A simulation approach.
Geoarchaeology, 7: 185-208.
Rabinovich, R. (1987). Taphonomic Study of a Faunal
Assemblage from Biq'at Quneitra Site. Unpub. M.A.
thesis, The Hebrew University, Jerusalem (in Hebrew).
109
Indian porcupine taphonomy
Rabinovich, R. & Horwitz, L.K. (1994). An experimental
aproach to the study of porcupine damage to
bones: A gnawing issue. In (Patou-Mathis, M., ed.)
Taphonomie, Bone Modification. 6e Table Ronde.
Outillage: Peu Elaboré en Os et Bois de Cérvidés
IV. Belgium: Editions du CEDARC, pp. 97-118.
Ropohl, D., Scheithauer, R. & Pollak, S. (1995). Postmortem
injuries inflicted by domestic golden hamster:
Morphological aspects and evidence by DNA
typing. Forensic Science International, 72 (2): 9.
Sever, Z. & Mendelssohn, H. (1991). Spatial movement
patterns of porcupines (Hystrix indica). Mammalia,
55: 187-205.
Shipman, P. & Rose, J.J. (1988). Bone tools: An
experimental approach. In (Olsen, S., ed.) SEM in
Archaeology. Oxford: British Archaeological Reports,
pp. 303-336.
Thornton, M. & Fee, J. (2001). Rodent gnawing as a
taphonomic agent: implications for archaeology. In
(Gerlach, S.C. & Murray, M.S., eds.) People and
Wildlife in Northern America: Essays in Honor of
R. Dale Guthrie. Oxford: BAR International Series
944, pp. 300-306.
Tsokos, M., Matschke, J., Gehl, A., Koops, E. &
Puschel, K. (1999). Skin and soft tissue artifacts
due to postmortem damage caused by rodents.
Forensic Science International, 104 (1): 47-57.
Więckowski, W. (in press). The human remains. In (Cohen,
S., ed.) Excavations at Tel Zahara (2006-2009): Final
Report. The Hellenistic and Roman Strata. Oxford:
BAR International Series.
Wilby, A., Shachak, M. & Boeken, B. (2001). Integration
of ecosystem engineering and tropic effects of
herbivores. Oikos, 92: 436-444.
Wood, W.R. & Johnson, D.L. (1978). A survey of
disturbance processes in archaeological site formation.
In (Schiffer, M.B., ed.) Advances in Archaeological
Method and Theory, Vol. 1. New York: Academic
Press, pp. 315-381.
110
Horwitz et al.
1 red slip sherd, interior and exterior, bowl,
Bronze Age?
1 red slipped body sherd
1 large bowl rim, red slip interior and exterior,
Early Bronze Age
Appendix A: Material culture retrieved in association
with the Indian porcupine burrows
The survey and subsequent excavation of two of the
Indian porcupine burrows (B6 and B8) yielded a
relatively small amount of material culture. The vast
majority of this material consisted of very small,
plainware body sherds; in general, these sherds were
either two small or too generic to be identifiable for
either form or date. Other diagnostic sherds from the
burrows ranged from the Early Bronze Age through the
Islamic eras, which is entirely consistent with what is
known about the occupational history of Tel Zahara. It
demonstrates how material may be mixed as a
consequence of porcupine bioturbation
In addition to the ceramic finds, the survey
and excavations uncovered a small amount of flint,
glass, and other small objects, including two beads;
these last items might have been part of the grave
goods associated with the disturbed human remains
from the cemetery, although it is also possible that they
were introduced into the area by the burrowing activity
of the porcupines.
B4:
1 piece of flint
1 sherd, open form, with vertical grooves on
rim, date?
45 plainware sherds, mixed
B5:
2 pieces glass, modern
1 stopper
1 tessera
86 plainware sherds, mixed
B6:
1 piece flint
1 jar rim, Roman
1 rim and handle of jar, date?
24 plainware sherds
B7:
1 piece flint
1 waster, Islamic?
1 bowl rim, Roman
36 plainware body sherds
B8:
1 sherd Islamic glazed ware
2 pieces flint
1 red slip bowl rim, Roman
157 plainware sherds
A complete list of the finds from the burrows
is provided below.
B1:
2 pieces flint
73 plainware body sherds, mixed periods
1 bone bead, 1 mm thick, 0.9 mm wide
B2:
1 stone weight (?), flat circular stone, pierced in
center, 3.9 cm wide, 0.7 cm thick
1 stone bead, greenish (agate?), 0.8 cm wide,
0.4 cm thick
3 pieces flint
27 plainware sherds
1 Early Bronze Age red slipped sherd
1 red and black body, possibly Early Bronze Age
Trench between B-6 and B-8:
1 piece Islamic glazed ware
1 piece Roman glass
2 tessera
1 bowl rim, Roman
1 carinated bowl body fragment, Middle
Bronze Age
1 store jar rim
111
Indian porcupine taphonomy
Appendix B: List of malacological specimens recovered
from the Indian porcupine burrows
Aquatic species
Melanopsis buccinoidea (Olivier, 1801)
SW-B1: four shells of which one is missing the top
whorls and three show damaged apertures;
SW-B2: four shells of which three show damaged
apertures;
SW-B4: seven shells of which six show damaged
apertures;
NW-B5: six shells of which one is missing the top
whorls and five show damaged apertures;
NW-B6: four shells of which one is missing the top
whorls, all show damaged apertures;
SE-B7: one shell missing the top whorls and with a
damaged aperture;
SE-B8: four shells of which one is missing a large part
of the body whorl;
Excavation between B6 and B8: one burnt shell with a
damaged aperture.
Melanopsis cerithiopsis Bourguignat 1884
SW-B1: four shells;
SW-B2: three shells;
SW-B4: nine shells of which five show damaged
apertures;
NW-B5: eight shells of which one is missing the top
whorls and all show damaged apertures;
NW-B6: two shells, both show damaged apertures;
SE-B7: two shells both with damaged apertures;
SE-B8: three shells of which two show damaged
apertures;
Excavation between B6 and B8: two shells of which
one burnt.
Melanopsis hybrid?
SW-B4: one shell;
SE-B8: one shell with a damaged aperture.
Family Unionidae
Unio terminalis terminalis Bourguignat 1852
SW-B2: one tiny fragment.
Terrestrial Species
Monacha obstructa (Pfeiffer, 1842)
SW-B1: 14 shells of which one shows predation by a
small mammal;
SW-B2: eight shells of which one shows predation by a
small mammal;
SW-B4: 34 shells of which four show predation by
small mammals;
NW-B5: four shells of which one is heavily damaged
by a small mammal;
NW-B6: seven shells of which one shows predation by
a small mammal;
SE-B7: two shells of which one is missing the top whorls;
SE-B8: one shell;
Excavation between B6 and B8: two shells.
Xeropicta vestalis joppensis (Schmidt, 1855)
SW-B1: six shells of which one shows predation by a
small mammal;
SW-B2: two shells of which one shows predation by a
small mammal;
SW-B4: nine shells of which one shows predation by a
small mammal;
NW-B5: five shells of which two damaged by small
mammals;
NW-B6: two shells;
SE-B7: one shell.
Family Helicidae
Helix engaddensis engaddensis Bourguignat, 1852
SW-B1: one shells showing a small hole probably made
by an invertebrate larva, and three tiny fragments of
probably one other specimen;
SW-B2: one fragment of the lower part of the
columella of a juvenile specimen;
SW-B4: three shells and two small fragments;
NW-B5: four small shells and two small fragments;
NW-B6: one small shell;
SE-B7: one shell;
SE-B8: three fragments belonging to at least two different
shells;
Excavation between dens B6 and B8: one small fragment
of the body whorl near the aperture.
112