• Contenu principal
  • Menu
OpenEdition Books
  • Accueil
  • Catalogue de 16030 livres
  • Éditeurs
  • Auteurs
  • Facebook
  • X
  • Partager
    • Facebook

    • X

    • Accueil
    • Catalogue de 16030 livres
    • Éditeurs
    • Auteurs
  • Ressources numériques en sciences humaines et sociales

    • OpenEdition
  • Nos plateformes

    • OpenEdition Books
    • OpenEdition Journals
    • Hypothèses
    • Calenda
  • Bibliothèques

    • OpenEdition Freemium
  • Suivez-nous

  • Lettre d’information
OpenEdition Search

Redirection vers OpenEdition Search.

À quel endroit ?
  • CNRS Éditions
  • ›
  • Gallia Préhistoire Supplément
  • ›
  • Klimonas
  • ›
  • Bio-archaeological evidence / Les témoin...
  • ›
  • Dogs in the village… and with the dead?...
  • CNRS Éditions
  • CNRS Éditions
    CNRS Éditions
    Informations sur la couverture
    Table des matières
    Liens vers le livre
    Informations sur la couverture
    Table des matières
    Formats de lecture

    Plan

    Plan détaillé Texte intégral Introduction 1. Skeletal dog remains 2. Taphonomic impact and status of dogs in the village 3. Location of the skeletal remains and their possible meaning(s) 4. Discussion and conclusions Annexe Notes de bas de page Auteur

    Klimonas

    Ce livre est recensé par

    Précédent Suivant
    Table des matières

    Chap. 27

    Dogs in the village… and with the dead?

    Des chiens dans le village… et avec les morts ?

    Jean‑Denis Vigne

    p. 461-466

    Résumés

    Together with the discrete but unquestionable presence of carnivore taphonomic marks on large mammal bones (diaphysis cylinders, gnawing and digestion marks), the 35 PPNA dog bones from Klimonas are the earliest evidence of the presence of the species in Cyprus. Osteometric data, especially on a sub-complete hemi-mandible, indicate that these dogs were indistinguishable from PPNA dogs on the continent. The low frequency of dogs (0.5%) is in accordance with most continental PPNA sites. Nearly 90% of the dog bones were found in special places relating to the first and second phases of the Communal building (entrance, earth floor, benches). This specific spatial distribution denotes the special processing of dog remains after their death. Parallels with the processing of deceased human bodies is discussed, as well as the possible psychopomp value of dogs. In addition to this symbolic use, dogs were also used as a food resource, as cleaners of the village through scavenging and probably for hunting wild boars.

    Les 35 ossements de Canis trouvés dans les unités stratigraphiques du PPNA de Klimonas concernent toutes les parties du corps d’au moins trois individus, en majorité des adultes. Leur état de dégradation suggère une consommation de viande et de moelle osseuse de chien, comme sur tous les sites du PPN. La présence d’une faible proportion de cylindres diaphysaires (3 %) et de marques de rognage (0,6 %) et de digestion (0,2 %) indique clairement que des chiens vivaient dans le village, au moins comme commensaux, au même titre que les souris et les chats, mais aussi peut-être comme animaux de compagnie. C’est la plus ancienne attestation de chien à Chypre. Quatre-vingt-trois mesures prises notamment sur une hémi-mandibule édentée sub-complète indiquent que ces chiens n’étaient pas les descendants d’une possible (mais non attestée) lignée endémique locale qui aurait été introduite au cours de l’Épipaléolithique et aurait évolué de manière isolée à Chypre. Leur morphologie était au contraire très similaire à celle des chiens PPNA levantins tels que décrits par exemple à Mureybet. Des chiens ont donc été introduits depuis le continent au fil du PPNA. La faible fréquence des restes de chiens (0,5 % des 6 603 spécimens identifiés de Klimonas) apparaît néanmoins relativement élevée en comparaison des sites tels que Mureybet (0,27, 0,07 et 0,16 % pour le Natufien, le Khiamien et le PPNA, respectivement) ou Jerf el-Ahmar et Dja’de (PPNA, 0,1 %). Pour ce critère comme pour beaucoup d’autres, Klimonas ne se distingue cependant pas fortement des villages continentaux du PPNA final. Près de 90 % des ossements de chiens ont été trouvés dans des endroits particuliers des deux premières phases du Bâtiment communautaire (entrée, sols damés, banquettes) où ils ont probablement été déposés sous forme d’os, de pièces de viande ou de peaux, pour une raison sans doute symbolique. Le parallèle avec les très rares ossements humains, dont 80% ont été trouvés dans le Bâtiment communautaire sous forme d’os de la tête, suggère une association étroite entre humains et chiens et une forte valeur symbolique de ces derniers, peut-être en tant qu’animaux psychopompes. Comme la plupart des restes humains étaient absents de Klimonas, comme ils l’étaient aussi de certains sites du Levant Nord, on peut même se demander si la rareté des ossements de chiens ne résulterait pas (au moins en partie) d’un traitement identique des corps de chiens et des humains après leur mort, traitement qui aurait conduit à leur dématérialisation par crémation, exposition aux vautours, immersion marine… La consommation de viande et de moelle, le nettoyage du village par charognage et l’utilisation symbolique psychopompe sont trois composantes de la relation entre humains et chiens ayant laissé des traces archéozoologiques discrètes mais indiscutables à Klimonas. Nous pouvons cependant soupçonner plusieurs autres dimensions de cette familiarité. C’est peut-être le cas de la contribution à la chasse, axée sur les groupes de sangliers. La dimension affective est également envisageable.

    Texte intégral Introduction 1. Skeletal dog remains 2. Taphonomic impact and status of dogs in the village 3. Location of the skeletal remains and their possible meaning(s) 4. Discussion and conclusions Annexe Notes de bas de page Auteur

    Texte intégral

    Introduction

    1Wolves (Canis lupus) became domestic dogs (C. familiaris) independently in several parts of the Old World c. 15,000–12,000 cal BC, at the latest (Larson et al. 2012, Frantz et al. 2016). Southwest Asia is one of the two or three main known places where wolves were domesticated, as evidenced by morphological and genetic evidence (Larson et al. 2012, Ollivier et al. 2018, Bergström et al. 2022) and by the frequent funerary association of dogs with the dead (Davis and Valla 1978, Dayan 1994, Tchernov and Valla 1997).

    2Large carnivores, namely Canidae, were absent from the Late Glacial endemic fauna of Cyprus (Boekshoten and Sondaar 1972). However, even though there is no evidence of Canidae in the Akrotiri-Aetokremnos faunal record, given the date of wolf domestication in the Levant, it is plausible that dogs were introduced by the Epipaleolithic people that lived on the island during the 11th millennium (Simmons 1999, Vigne and Guilaine 2004). Before the excavation of Klimonas, the earliest known dog bones from Cyprus were dated to the early phase A of Shillourokambos, c. 8500–8100 cal BC (Vigne 2011). Out of the 42 PPN dog bones found in Sector 1 of that site, 55% came from the early phases. Dogs decrease in number towards the middle of the 8th millennium and are almost absent from the middle and late phases of village occupation (Vigne 2021a). Later on, for enigmatic reasons, dogs were absent from the 7th–3rd millennium faunal records of Cyprus and only reappeared in small numbers in some Chalcolithic sites (Davis 1989, 2003, Croft 1991). A consequence of this unique situation is that bone assemblages from Cyprus are exceptionally well preserved between 7500 and 2500 cal BC, especially the long bone extremities and the axial skeleton, due to the absence of any carnivore attacks (Croft 1998: 211, Vigne and Guilaine 2004, Vigne 2011a: 862-863).

    3In this chapter, we examine the presence of dogs at Klimonas from both viewpoints: skeletal remains and taphonomic attacks on the faunal remains. We also address the question of the technical use and symbolic status of dogs by the late PPNA Klimonas villagers.

    1. Skeletal dog remains

    4We found a total of 40 Canis bones at Klimonas. Five of them definitely or possibly date to the Sotira period (appendix 27-1). The 35 PPNA bones represent at least two adult individuals (two second lower incisors), although we suspect the presence of at least one additional young dog, namely represented by a third unfused metacarpus (less than 6 months old). The bones are from all anatomical regions (tab. 27-1).

    Tab. 27-1 – Distribution of the 35 PPNA dog bones found at Klimonas according to the different anatomic units.

    Répartition des 35 restes de chiens PPNA trouvés à Klimonas entre les différentes parties du squelette.

    5Most of the large bones are fragmented, sometimes with spiral breakage, showing that they are fresh bone fractures. The deficit of long bones (tab. 27-1) suggests that they were systematically broken for marrow consumption, although no resulting bone flakes were found. No cut or burn marks were visible, but the surface of six specimens was sufficiently well preserved to detect possible traces. One bone was calcinated (proximal radius). All the bones were adult, except for three (caudal vertebra, metacarpus and distal tibia). Even though there is no clear evidence, it is probable that villagers ate dog meat, as did the Shillourokambos dwellers some centuries later (Vigne and Guilaine 2004, Vigne 2011a, 2021a).

    6Eighty-three measurements were recorded on 21 of these 35 specimens (appendix 27-2). Unfortunately, there were no cheek teeth. Most of the measurements come from extremity bones, for which there is no reference on the continent.

    7In these conditions, the smallest diameter of the humerus shaft is the only informative postcranial data. At 11.4 mm, it is very similar to the two measurements from Shillourokambos (11.9 and 12.0 mm), clearly smaller than Levantine wolves (superior to 13 mm) and more robust than Natufian dogs (10.1 mm; Vigne 2021a, fig. 12).

    8The relatively complete, but toothless left hemi-mandible found in the Communal building (fig. 27-1) provides more information. Aside from the height of the horizontal ramus, all measurements are smaller than those of Palestinian Natufian domestic dogs (after Tchernov and Valla 1997; fig. 27-2, A). It is very similar to the early phase C mandible from Shillourokambos (St 18, c. 7700–7600 cal BC, according to Vigne 2011a), in terms of size and the proportion between horizontal ramus height and raw tooth length. However, more marked similarities in size and proportions were found with the Khiamian left mandible from Mureybet (IIA, Gourichon and Helmer 2008; fig. 27-2, B), which is only slightly smaller in all measurements than that of Klimonas. The Mureybet specimen is considered by Gourichon and Helmer (2008) as a short-muzzled dog, more similar to PPNA Jericho dogs than to earlier Natufian animals.

    Fig. 27-1 – Dog left hemi-mandible in occlusal (A), lingual (B) and lateral (C) views (KL12-St 10- SU 10.44).

    Hémi-mandibule gauche de chien en vues occlusale (A), linguale (B) et latérale (C). KL12-St 10-US 10.44. Clichés et DAO J.‑D. Vigne, CNRS.

    Photos and CAD J.‑D. Vigne, CNRS.

    Fig. 27-2 – A, log ratio comparison of the Klimonas dog mandible measurements with those of Palestinian Natufian dogs (after Tchernov and Valla 1997), and Shillourokambos Middle PPNB dog measurements (after Vigne 2011a) with those of Middle and Late Haloula PPNB dogs (after Saña Segui 1999); the reference is the Natufian dogs’ average. B, log value comparison of Klimonas mandible measurements with those of the Mureybet IIA dog (after Gourichon and Helmer 2008).

    A, comparaison des rapports logarithmiques des mesures de la mandibule du chien de Klimonas avec celles des chiens du Natoufien de Palestine (d’après Tchernov et Valla 1997), du chien du PPNB moyen de Shillourokambos (d’après Vigne 2011) et des chiens du PPNB moyen et récent de Haloula (d’après Saña Segui 1999) ; la référence est la moyenne des chiens du Natoufien. B, comparaison des valeurs logarithmiques des mesures de la mandibule de Klimonas avec celle du chien Mureybet IIA (d’après Gourichon et Helmer 2008).

    9Our conclusion is that the Klimonas canid bone set unequivocally derives from the domestic dog. It is the earliest evidence of the presence of dogs in Cyprus and is morphologically similar to Levantine PPNA dogs, without any markers of insularity. The Klimonas dog bones could therefore result from continental introductions of dog meat joints or skins, as well as from the actual presence of living dogs in the village. The study of the taphonomic impact of dogs will resolve this question.

    2. Taphonomic impact and status of dogs in the village

    10Large carnivores produce a series of well-known taphonomic signatures on bone assemblages, namely tooth and gnawing marks; destruction of cancellous bone, especially the articular extremities; the production of diaphysis “cylinders”; and digested bones (Binford 1981, Lyman 1994, Fosse et al. 2012).

    11In the taphonomic analyses of chap. 24 (appendix 24-7, 24-8 and 24-9), we included a series of counts aiming to quantify the action of carnivores on the evolution of animal bones from the site, namely: (i) the unidentified proportion, which relates to the global level of degradation, (ii) the proportion of diaphysis cylinders, (iii) the relative proportion of extremities with reference to the diaphysis of long bones, (iv) gnawing and (v) digestive mark frequencies.

    12Appendix 27-3 cumulates these specific counts for the different types of contexts: earth floors of the Communal building (SUs 10.3, 10.5, 10.5, 10.10), primary deposits in a domestic building (B09), fills of four abandoned domestic buildings (B07-08-09-10), demolition products (B08) and rubbish pit (B25-26). The five above-mentioned taphonomic parameters revealed no significant differences between these various types of contexts (Chi²= 16.7, df=12, p= 0.16).

    13The cumulated counts of all contexts (tab. 27-2) are based on nearly 13,500 faunal remains. The low identification rate, especially in a context facilitated by the reduced number of species, denotes a high degree of degradation, as does the low rate of long bone extremities. However, the small number of occurrences of undisputable gnawing (33 in total, 0.6%) and digestion marks (9 in total, 0.17%; fig. 27-31) indicates that dogs were not the main cause of attrition on bone assemblages. As we argued in chap. 24, the multiple reutilizations of local sediments for successive building disturbed the bones included in the earth, and highly contributed to their degradation.

    Tab. 27-2 – Taphonomic parameters liable to reflect dog activity, cumulated on the main stratigraphic units of the B and Central Sectors, based on the data of appendix 27-3.

    Paramètres taphonomiques susceptibles de refléter l’activité des chiens, cumulés sur les principales unités stratigraphiques des Secteurs B et Central, d’après les données de l’annexe 27-3.

    Fig. 27-3 – Digestion marks on two second phalanges of wild boar in palmo-lateral view (B and C), compared to a non-digested 2nd phalanx (A, KL09-168-5, -30/-55, cf. SU 10.6) and on a 1st phalanx distal extremity (D, KL09-168-7, -75/-95). See also chap. 25, fig. 25-2,H).

    Marques de digestion sur deux secondes phalanges de sanglier en vue palmo-latérale (B et C), comparées à une seconde phalange non digérée (A, KL09-168-5,-30/-55, cf. SU 10.6), et sur l’extrémité distale d’une première phalange (D, KL09-168-7, -75/-95). Voir aussi chap. 25, fig. 25-2, H. Clichés et DAO J.‑D. Vigne, CNRS.

    Photos and CAD J.‑D. Vigne, CNRS.

    14However, though scarce, the occurrence of undisputable gnawing and digestion marks makes it clear that large carnivores impacted leftover bones, at least during the short time they were accessible in the rare middens, before being covered by huge quantities of earth from the constant degradation of buildings. As there were no other large carnivores here, only dogs can be considered as responsible for this rare but conclusive evidence.

    15This indicates that the 35 PPNA dog bones from Klimonas did not result from the importation of joints or skins from the continent but from the actual presence of dogs living in the village, possibly in rather small numbers.

    3. Location of the skeletal remains and their possible meaning(s)

    16The spatial distribution of the 35 PPNA dog remains is very uneven. Eighty-six percent of them came from the Communal building, mostly from the first (23%) and second (54%) phases. The bones were specifically located in the packed earth floor of the entrance of the first Communal building (SU 10.7, 10-10, 10.32, 10.44), especially the complete and damaged hemi-mandibles (same individual?), and in the earth floor (SU 10.6, 10.8) and benches (St 172, St 166) of the second Communal building (fig. 27-4). Conversely, the five specimens from Sector B were erratically disseminated in the fillings and destruction layers of buildings B08, B09 and B10.

    Fig. 27-4 – Spatial distribution of dog bones in Klimonas.

    Répartition spatiale des os de chien à Klimonas.

    17In spite of the small sample size, this distribution pattern is too irregular to result from a random spread. We interpret it as the consequence of a special treatment of dog bones that entailed the exclusion of some (or most?) of them from the bulk of food leftovers, and the intentional inclusion of others into the building earth of special areas of the Communal building (entrance, benches), in connection with the symbolic value of the latter. This symbolic deposition could have concerned isolated bones. The deposition of dog skins cannot be excluded, however, because of the relative abundance of jaws, teeth and limb bone extremities in the sample (tab. 27-1), which are the bones that remain in tanned skins.

    18Comparison with the distribution of the 13 human bones (chap. 32) may shed light on this enigmatic distribution. Ten (77%) were located in the Communal building, especially in the earth floors and benches around the entrance of the first construction phase. Like dog bones, human remains are rare and are primarily located in the Communal building, and were thus possibly intentionally deposited in some special places. This parallel not only suggests strong connections between dogs and humans in villagers’ symbolic representations but also a relationship between this connection and the world beyond, such as in the many burials associating dogs and humans in the Natufian South Levant. In the PPNA tradition, dogs are not part of symbolic animal representations or deposits (Helmer et al. 2004), but several species, including vultures and foxes, appear to have played a psychopomp role. Perhaps in Cyprus, where foxes were still absent during this period, dogs could have taken on their symbolic role.

    4. Discussion and conclusions

    19The 35 Canis bones found in the PPNA stratigraphic units of Klimonas concern all the body parts of at least three, mostly adult individuals. Their state of fragmentation suggests that dog meat and bone marrow were consumed, as at many PPN sites (Vigne and Guilaine 2004). The presence of a small proportion of diaphysis cylinders (3%), gnawing (0.6%) and digestion (0.2%) marks makes it clear that dogs were living in the village as commensal species, in the same way as mice and cats (chap. 28), but also maybe as pets. This is the earliest evidence of dogs in Cyprus.

    20Eighty-three measurements indicate that these dogs were not the offspring of a putative (but never evidenced) local endemic lineage that could have been introduced during the Epipaleolithic and evolved in isolation in Cyprus. Their morphology is conversely very similar to that of Levantine PPNA dogs described at Mureybet, for example. This denotes the introduction of dogs from the continent during the course of the PPNA.

    21The low frequency of dog remains (0.5% of the 6603 identified specimens from Klimonas) nevertheless appears relatively high with reference to sites such as Mureybet (0.27, 0.07 and 0.16% for the Natufian, Khiamian and PPNA, respectively, Gourichon and Helmer 2008), or Jerf el-Ahmar and Dja’de (PPNA, 0.1%, Gourichon 2004). For these criteria, as for many others, Klimonas does not significantly differ from continental Late PPNA villages.

    22Nearly 90% of dog bones were found in special deposits from the first two phases of the Communal building (entrance, packed floors, benches), where they were probably placed for symbolic reasons in the form of bones, meat or skins. The parallel with the very rare human bones, 80% of which were found in the Communal building in the form of skull bones, suggests a close association between humans and dogs and/or the strong symbolic value of dogs, possibly as psychopomp animals. As most of the human remains were absent from Klimonas, as they are from some North Levantine sites, it is pertinent to suggest that the scarcity of dog bones may result from the identical processing of (or at least some of) dog remains and human bodies after they died. This process could have involved cremation, exposure to vultures, immersion in the sea, etc.

    23Meat and marrow consumption, cleaning the village by scavenging and the psychopomp symbolic value are thus three components of the relationship between humans and dogs that left discrete but undisputable archaeozoological manifestations at Klimonas. We can, however, surmise on several other invisible aspects of this familiarity. The most obvious may be the contribution of dogs to wild boar hunting, which focused on family groups or groups of young animals (see chap. 29). Affective manifestations are invisible at Klimonas, but nonetheless possible, given the famous H104 Natufian burial with a puppy at Mallaha (Davis and Valla 1978).

    Annexe

    KLIMONAS-Ch27-A01, https://doi.org/10.34847/nkl.01ccxj98
    List of the specimens of Canidae found at Klimonas • Liste des spécimens de Canidae trouvés à Klimonas
    Jean-Denis VIGNE (CNRS)

    KLIMONAS-Ch27-A02, https://doi.org/10.34847/nkl.d62d1s9s
    Measurements (in mm) of Canis familiaris specimens recorded at Klimonas • Mesures (en mm) des restes de Canis familiaris enregistrés à Klimonas
    Jean-Denis VIGNE (CNRS)

    KLIMONAS-Ch27-A03, https://doi.org/10.34847/nkl.9226sp7r
    Comparison of the main taphonomic markers of dog activities in the different types of contexts of the Central and B Sectors of Klimonas • Comparaison des principaux marqueurs taphonomiques des activités canines dans les différents types de contextes des Secteurs Central et B de Klimonas
    Jean-Denis VIGNE (CNRS)

    Notes de bas de page

    1Digestion marks: five on large mammal bones (limb extremities), three on viper vertebrae (chap. 25), one on a rodent incisor (chap. 28).

    Auteur

    • Jean‑Denis Vigne
    Précédent Suivant
    Table des matières

    Creative Commons - Attribution - Pas d'Utilisation Commerciale - Pas de Modification 4.0 International - CC BY-NC-ND 4.0

    Le texte seul est utilisable sous licence Creative Commons - Attribution - Pas d'Utilisation Commerciale - Pas de Modification 4.0 International - CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. Les autres éléments (illustrations, fichiers annexes importés) sont « Tous droits réservés », sauf mention contraire.

    Voir plus de livres
    Les recherches à Lascaux (1952-1963)

    Les recherches à Lascaux (1952-1963)

    André Glory, Brigitte Delluc et Gilles Delluc (dir.)

    2008

    Les allées sépulcrales du Bassin parisien à la fin du Néolithique

    Les allées sépulcrales du Bassin parisien à la fin du Néolithique

    L’exemple de La Chaussée-Tirancourt

    Arnaud Blin

    2018

    Le bouquetin dans l’art paléolithique en Europe méditerranéenne

    Le bouquetin dans l’art paléolithique en Europe méditerranéenne

    Michel Martin

    2010

    Les sépultures individuelles campaniformes en France

    Les sépultures individuelles campaniformes en France

    Laure Salanova et Yaramila Tcheremissinoff (dir.)

    2011

    La grotte-abri de Peyrazet (Creysse, Lot, France) au Magdalénien

    La grotte-abri de Peyrazet (Creysse, Lot, France) au Magdalénien

    Originalité fonctionnelle d’un habitat des derniers chasseurs de rennes du Quercy

    Mathieu Langlais et Véronique Laroulandie (dir.)

    2021

    Klimonas

    Klimonas

    An Early Pre-Pottery Neolithic Village in Cyprus

    Jean-Denis Vigne, François Briois et Jean Guilaine (dir.)

    2024

    Voir plus de livres
    1 / 6
    Les recherches à Lascaux (1952-1963)

    Les recherches à Lascaux (1952-1963)

    André Glory, Brigitte Delluc et Gilles Delluc (dir.)

    2008

    Les allées sépulcrales du Bassin parisien à la fin du Néolithique

    Les allées sépulcrales du Bassin parisien à la fin du Néolithique

    L’exemple de La Chaussée-Tirancourt

    Arnaud Blin

    2018

    Le bouquetin dans l’art paléolithique en Europe méditerranéenne

    Le bouquetin dans l’art paléolithique en Europe méditerranéenne

    Michel Martin

    2010

    Les sépultures individuelles campaniformes en France

    Les sépultures individuelles campaniformes en France

    Laure Salanova et Yaramila Tcheremissinoff (dir.)

    2011

    La grotte-abri de Peyrazet (Creysse, Lot, France) au Magdalénien

    La grotte-abri de Peyrazet (Creysse, Lot, France) au Magdalénien

    Originalité fonctionnelle d’un habitat des derniers chasseurs de rennes du Quercy

    Mathieu Langlais et Véronique Laroulandie (dir.)

    2021

    Klimonas

    Klimonas

    An Early Pre-Pottery Neolithic Village in Cyprus

    Jean-Denis Vigne, François Briois et Jean Guilaine (dir.)

    2024

    Voir plus de chapitres

    Location, excavation, nomenclature

    Jean‑Denis Vigne, François Briois, Christophe Benech et al.

    The Neolithic village of Klimonas: technical, social and symbolic aspects; insularity and connectivity

    Jean‑Denis Vigne, Jean Guilaine, Remi Hadad et al.

    Ritual slaughter and symbolic bone deposits of boar bones. Sketch of an island bestiary

    Jean‑Denis Vigne

    The extinct small Cypriot wild boar (Sus scrofa circeus): osteological description, origins, and insular evolution

    Jean‑Denis Vigne, Thomas Cucchi, Auriale Domont et al.

    Wild boar seasonality, hunting-strategies and techno-economic utilizations

    Jean‑Denis Vigne, Angelos Hadjikoumis, Marie Balasse et al.

    Faunal remains: taxonomy, taphonomy, archaeological contexts, and animal resources

    Jean‑Denis Vigne et Isabelle Carrère

    Remarkable deposits: caches and hoards

    Jean‑Denis Vigne, François Briois, Remi Hadad et al.

    Utilitarian devices and facilities of the residential areas

    Jean‑Denis Vigne, François Briois et Jean Guilaine

    Building and village: main characteristics

    Jean‑Denis Vigne, Yodrick Franel, Pantelitsa Mylona et al.

    The southeast area of the middle terrace (Central and B Sectors)

    Jean‑Denis Vigne, Yodrik Franel, Nicolas Delsol et al.

    Sector B, residential area on the slope break between the middle and lower terraces

    Jean‑Denis Vigne, François Briois et Yodrik Franel

    Sector F, building 800 and other evidence of occupation on the upper terrace

    Jean‑Denis Vigne, Yodrik Franel, François Briois et al.

    Voir plus de chapitres
    1 / 12

    Location, excavation, nomenclature

    Jean‑Denis Vigne, François Briois, Christophe Benech et al.

    The Neolithic village of Klimonas: technical, social and symbolic aspects; insularity and connectivity

    Jean‑Denis Vigne, Jean Guilaine, Remi Hadad et al.

    Ritual slaughter and symbolic bone deposits of boar bones. Sketch of an island bestiary

    Jean‑Denis Vigne

    The extinct small Cypriot wild boar (Sus scrofa circeus): osteological description, origins, and insular evolution

    Jean‑Denis Vigne, Thomas Cucchi, Auriale Domont et al.

    Wild boar seasonality, hunting-strategies and techno-economic utilizations

    Jean‑Denis Vigne, Angelos Hadjikoumis, Marie Balasse et al.

    Faunal remains: taxonomy, taphonomy, archaeological contexts, and animal resources

    Jean‑Denis Vigne et Isabelle Carrère

    Remarkable deposits: caches and hoards

    Jean‑Denis Vigne, François Briois, Remi Hadad et al.

    Utilitarian devices and facilities of the residential areas

    Jean‑Denis Vigne, François Briois et Jean Guilaine

    Building and village: main characteristics

    Jean‑Denis Vigne, Yodrick Franel, Pantelitsa Mylona et al.

    The southeast area of the middle terrace (Central and B Sectors)

    Jean‑Denis Vigne, Yodrik Franel, Nicolas Delsol et al.

    Sector B, residential area on the slope break between the middle and lower terraces

    Jean‑Denis Vigne, François Briois et Yodrik Franel

    Sector F, building 800 and other evidence of occupation on the upper terrace

    Jean‑Denis Vigne, Yodrik Franel, François Briois et al.

    Accès ouvert

    Accès ouvert freemium

    ePub

    PDF

    PDF du chapitre

    Suggérer l’acquisition à votre bibliothèque

    Acheter

    Édition imprimée

    • amazon.fr
    • decitre.fr
    • mollat.com
    • leslibraires.fr
    • placedeslibraires.fr
    ePub / PDF

    1Digestion marks: five on large mammal bones (limb extremities), three on viper vertebrae (chap. 25), one on a rodent incisor (chap. 28).

    Klimonas

    X Facebook Email

    Klimonas

    Ce livre est diffusé en accès ouvert freemium. L’accès à la lecture en ligne est disponible. L’accès aux versions PDF et ePub est réservé aux bibliothèques l’ayant acquis. Vous pouvez vous connecter à votre bibliothèque à l’adresse suivante : https://freemium.openedition.org/oebooks

    Suggérer l’acquisition à votre bibliothèque Acheter ce livre aux formats PDF et ePub

    Si vous avez des questions, vous pouvez nous écrire à access[at]openedition.org

    Klimonas

    Vérifiez si votre bibliothèque a déjà acquis ce livre : authentifiez-vous à OpenEdition Freemium for Books.

    Vous pouvez suggérer à votre bibliothèque d’acquérir un ou plusieurs livres publiés sur OpenEdition Books. N’hésitez pas à lui indiquer nos coordonnées : access[at]openedition.org

    Vous pouvez également nous indiquer, à l’aide du formulaire suivant, les coordonnées de votre bibliothèque afin que nous la contactions pour lui suggérer l’achat de ce livre. Les champs suivis de (*) sont obligatoires.

    Veuillez, s’il vous plaît, remplir tous les champs.

    La syntaxe de l’email est incorrecte.

    Référence numérique du chapitre

    Format

    Vigne, J. (2024). Dogs in the village… and with the dead?. In J.-D. Vigne, F. Briois, & J. Guilaine (éds.), Klimonas. Paris: CNRS Éditions. https://doi.org/10.4000/129km
    Vigne, Jean‑Denis. « Dogs in the village… and With the Dead? ». In Klimonas, édité par Jean-Denis Vigne, François Briois, et Jean Guilaine. Paris: CNRS Éditions, 2024. doi:10.4000/129km.
    Vigne, Jean‑Denis. « Dogs in the village… and With the Dead? ». Klimonas, édité par Jean-Denis Vigne et al., CNRS Éditions, 2024, https://doi.org/10.4000/129km.

    Référence numérique du livre

    Format

    Vigne, J.-D., Briois, F., & Guilaine, J. (éds.). (2024). Klimonas. Paris: CNRS Éditions. https://doi.org/10.4000/129kn
    Vigne, Jean-Denis, François Briois, et Jean Guilaine, éd. Klimonas. Paris: CNRS Éditions, 2024. doi:10.4000/129kn.
    Vigne, Jean-Denis, et al., éditeurs. Klimonas. CNRS Éditions, 2024, https://doi.org/10.4000/129kn.
    Compatible avec Zotero Zotero

    1 / 3

    CNRS Éditions

    CNRS Éditions

    • Mentions légales
    • Plan du site
    • Se connecter

    Suivez-nous

    • Facebook
    • X
    • Flux RSS

    URL : http://www.cnrseditions.fr

    Email : cnrseditions@cnrseditions.fr

    Adresse :

    15 rue Malebranche

    75005

    Paris

    France

    OpenEdition
    • Candidater à OpenEdition Books
    • Connaître le programme OpenEdition Freemium
    • Commander des livres
    • S’abonner à la lettre d’OpenEdition
    • CGU d’OpenEdition Books
    • Accessibilité : partiellement conforme
    • Données personnelles
    • Gestion des cookies
    • Système de signalement