Materials

The materials of the modern skeletal samples of the Caprinae and Gazella come from

115

museums and collections in the UK, Europe and America. As shown in Table 5.1, Table 5.2, and Table 5.3, a total of 185 records of non-Ovis Caprinae and Gazella, and 185 records of Ovis specimens were investigated in this study.

Scientific Name Common

Table 5.1The number of the modern comparative specimens studied of the non-Ovis Caprinae and Gazella. M: male; F: female; U: unknown; Ad: adult; Sub: sub-adult;

Juv: juvenile.

Groups Total Adult Subadult

M F U M F U

Country Sheep 26 4 10 6 1 0 5

Rambouillet Sheep 13 4 9 0 0 0 0

Argali×Domestic Sheep 21 16 5 0 0 0 0

Table 5.3The number of the modern comparative specimens studied for the different breeds of domestic sheep from the different sources. M: male; F: female; U: unknown;

Ad: adult; Sub: sub-adult

The museums and collections holding these specimens are: The Grahame Clark Laboratory for Zooarchaeology (GCZ), Cambridge; the University Museum of Zoology, Cambridge (CUMZ); the Staatssammlung für Anthropologie und Paläoanatomie,

Scientific

Table 5.2The number of the modern comparative specimens studied for the wild Ovis distributed across Eurasia. M: male; F: female; U: unknown; Ad: adult; Sub: sub-adult.

116

München (SAPM); the Berlin Museum für Naturkunde (BMN); the Muséum national d'Histoire naturelle, Paris (MNHN); the collection of the Zooarchaeology Laboratory of the University of Tübingen (TBG); the Museum für Haustierkunde ―Julius Kühn‖, Martin‐Luther University of Halle‐Wittenberg (MHJ); the American Museum of Natural History, New York (AMNH); the Smithsonian National Museum of Natural History (USNM); the Museum of Comparative Zoology, Harvard (MCZ); and the Field Museum, Chicago (FMNH).

Apart from the bones examined by myself, some metric data of Pseudois from Götze (1998)are added for osteometric analysis. Although Capra sibirica are not distributed in my research region currently, 25 specimens of this species were examined, since it was not sure if this species was distributed in the research area in prehistory and the osteometric data of Capra sibirica are found meaningful for this research.

Since a vital question of the research is whether domestic and/or wild sheep (species) are in my sample, it would have been ideal if a good sample of definite prehistoric domestic sheep (e.g. those of the Iron Age) from the study region could have been compared, because it would be safer to assume that they are morphologically similar to the Neolithic and Bronze Age sheep from the sites. However, due to the limited zooarchaeological work in this region, such specimens were not obtained. Instead, modern Ovis aries in the UK and Europe (country sheep and Rambouillet sheep) were compared;

the assumption had to be that they are similar to the domestic sheep in prehistoric Western China.

Furthermore, although the only wild Ovis in this region is Ovis ammon, the modern specimens of other wild Ovis in Eurasia are also incorporated in the study, as well as the crossbreeds of Ovis ammon and Ovis aries. This is because the origins of domestic sheep in Western China likely involved Ovis aries spread from the west, but whether there was any gene flow with different populations of wild Ovis during the long-distance movement to China is unclear (some domestic sheep may have gone feral and appear to be ‗wild‘, (cross)bred with the wild and/or domestic sheep). In addition, the routes of migration(s)

117

are unclear and may have taken the course through the areas where Ovis orientalis and/or Ovis vignei were distributed. As evidenced by the movements of crops and other material cultures in prehistory, there was more than one route along which domestication dispersed into and out of China (Boivin et al. 2012, Fuller and Boivin 2009).

Therefore, the archaeological specimens were analysed in comparison with the modern specimens of all wild Caprinae, gazelle in Western China and Ovis in Eurasia and domestic sheep and goats, including Pseudois nayaur, Nemorhaedus, Capricornis, Capra hircus, O. ammon, O. orientalis, O. vignei, O. aries, and O. musimon. Although O.

musimon is feral domestic sheep in Europe, it represents a segment in the evolutionary history of domestic sheep from Near East to other areas and would be useful for comparison.

Three groups of Ovis aries were examined (country sheep, Rambouillet sheep, and crossbreeds of Argali×domestic sheep) in order to check their difference compared with the wild Eurasian Ovis and the effect on the osteomorphology caused by crossbreeding between the domestic sheep and Ovis ammon (Argali). In the country sheep group, the majority are from England, including Soay domestic and some of the unknown-breed country sheep, while a small part were labelled as domestic sheep descended Ovis musimon in the zoos of Germany, France, and the US. The Rambouillet sheep^13F14 are those kept at Halle farm in an early twentieth century. The crossbred sheep Argali×domestic sheep are products of the experiments of hybridization also at Halle farm in the early twentieth century. Most of these sheep were with one of their parents from a Rambouillet or a country sheep, and the other one a crossbred of Rambouillet and Ovis ammon^14F15

14Rambouillet sheep: a breed of sheep developed since eighteenth century on the experimental Royal farm of France. It is now a well-known dual-purpose breed for its superior wool and meat.

15Ten Ovis ammon in Halle were captured wild animals transported through Asia by Carl Hagenbeck (1844-1913), an important animal dealer who undertook expeditions mainly to Altai Mountains and Mongolia to capture wild animals for selling them to the world. However, the real origins of these ‘O. ammon’ might be complex and there is no other evidence supporting their identity. These animals were brought to Germany in the beginning of the 20^th century and the journey took 2-3 months. During this period, the sheep were notfed well enough. The

118

(usually a multiple crosses, which means an offspring of the offspring of Rambouillet×

Ovis ammon and Rambouillet or country sheep). In general, the gene of most of the crossbreds in the samples include only a small proportion of Ovis ammon and a big portion of Rambouillet and country sheep from central Europe in the early twentieth century. The one with the largest proportion (1/4) of Ovis ammon is the sample‗Ramb×

Argali 811/92‘; its pedigree is illustrated in Figure 5.1. All the other Argali×domestic sheep in the study contained less than 1/4 Ovis ammon inheritance.

Figure 5.1The pedigree chart of the sample ‗Ramb×Argali 811/92‘. As can be seen, it has 1/4 portion of inheritance from Ovis ammon.

In order to control dimorphism due to age and sexual difference, the specimens of different age and sex categories were compared. According to the epiphysis fusion dates, three age groups in the study can be distinguished. The criteria to classify the specimens are based on Bökönyi (1970) and Greenfield (1986).

 Juvenile:

animals became very thin if they arrive alive. Stress factors like captive condition, starving, the different feeding and new groups may play a role. A high amount of them died in captivity (usually after a few months or 1-3 years) (R. Schafbergpers. comm. October 2014).

119

 the bones are much smaller than those of sub-adult;

 acetabulum (ilium, ischium and pubis) and proximal radius fuse in the early stage of the juvenile;

 distal epiphyseal of humerus, tibia and metapodials fuse in the late stage;

 proximal phalanges fuse in late stage;

 carpals and tarsals fuse in late stage.

 Sub-adult:

 bones from this age group are larger than those of juveniles and have almost reached, but not quite, their adult size;

 proximal humerus, ulna, femur, tibia, calcaneum,and fibula fuse in the late stage of subadult;

 distal radius, ulna, femur, fibula fused in late stage.

 Adult:

 bones in this group have grown to the full size;

 all long bones fused.

While the majority of specimens of domestic animals (Ovis aries and Capra hircus) held the collections are from females, for most wild species male and female specimens are kept in a balanced number.Ideally, at least twenty specimens should be examined for each species (J. Peters, pers. comm. March 2013). However, due to the limitation of the research, this number was more or less reached only for the humeri and metapodials.

The status of wild (feral) or zoo-bred animals was noted for each specimen whereas possible. Ideally, only the wild animals should be studied for the Caprinae and gazelle in Western China. However, in order to enhance the number of the specimens, a number of zoo animals are included in this study, as it is known that the skeletons of these zoo specimens do not differ osteoscopically from those of free-ranging individuals, although zoo animals can be smaller than their relatives living in the wild (J. Peters pers. comm.

March 2014).

120

Originally, cranium, all dentition, and most of the skeletal elements were studied.

However, it was found subsequently that the distinctive features on skulls are not particularly useful due to the low frequency of complete preservation of the diagnostic element in the archaeological samples. Furthermore, the distinctions on dentition between the different genus/species are small whilst the individual variations are striking. The focus is therefore placed on selected skeletal elements, including distal scapula,distal humerus, proximal radius, distal metacarpals, proximal femur, distal tibia, distal metatarsals,and first phalanges. Some other skeletal elements were also studied, but they are not presented since it was found that the criteria on them were of very little use for archaeological identification in this research.The criteria derived from the previous literature are annotated.

The information on the collection number, age group, sex, origin, wild/zoo status of the examined specimens, which are available as a result of the information given in the collections of the respective museums, can be found in Appendices B and C.