Re: Counting Sheep

From: Piotr Gasiorowski
Message: 1723
Date: 2000-02-29

 
----- Original Message -----
From: Piotr Gasiorowski
To: cybalist@eGroups.com
Sent: Monday, February 28, 2000 8:19 AM
Subject: [cybalist] Re: Odp: Danubian Urheimat

 
An afterthought (sorry):
Sabine
 
Mind you, we are talking of different things: I mean BONES in the archaeological record, and you mean LIVE sheep in a flock. There must be a certain stable proportion of adult sheep in any flock to guarantee continued reproduction. But if one's main purpose is to breed a large number of surplus lambs to be killed for meat, it is THEIR bones that will predominate in your rubbish heap. Bones give us information about kill-off patterns, not about the composition of the flock itself.
Piotr
"ivanovas/milatos" <ivanova-@...> wrote: 
original article:http://www.egroups.com/group/cybalist/?start=1709
> Hello,
> 
> Pjotr, you wrote:
> 
> >The ratio of sheep to goats (20:1) and adult (68%) to immature (32%)
sheep at typical TRB settlements in Poland are good indirect evidence
of wool production.<
> 
> I'm not trying to tell you they didn't produce wool, but the ratio
you give here looks quite similar to what I'm used to from herds that
are not raised for wool production but for milk and meat. Could you
explain your point here a little more clearly?
> 
> Sabine

I'm not a shepherd, but Payne (1973, based on Anatolian material) and
Cribb (1985, for Europe) agree that a profile with two-thirds of adult
sheep is most typical of wool-producing flocks; the same pattern holds
for goats if raised mainly for milk. By comparison, in the Late
Danubian settlements in Germany, Hungary and Poland the proportion of
adult sheep and goats is much lower (while adult cattle bones are the
norm).

Piotr