Estimating the age of domestic fowl (Gallus gallus domesticusL. 1758) cockerels through spur development

Sean Paul Doherty,Julia Best,Caroline Skelton,James Morris,Naomi Sykes,Sheila Hamilton‐Dyer,Richard Thomas,Rebecca Smallman,Alison Foster,Helina Woldekiros,Peta Sadler

doi:10.1002/oa.2988

Abstract

AbstractDetermining the age of bird remains after the cessation of growth is challenging due to the absence of techniques such as tooth eruption and wear available for mammals. Without these techniques, it is difficult to reconstruct hunting strategies, husbandry regimes, and wider human–animal relationships. This paper presents a new method, developed from a collection (n = 71) of known‐age specimens of domestic fowl (Gallus gallus domesticusL. 1758), for assessing age based on the fusion and size of the tarsometatarsal spur. Using this method, we reconstruct the demographics of domestic fowl from Iron Age to Early Modern sites in Britain to reveal the changing dynamics of human–domestic fowl relationships. We highlight the advanced age that cockerels often attained in their early history and how their life expectancies have subsequently declined.

Highlights

Determining the age of animals represented within archaeological assemblages is essential for understanding hunting strategies, husbandry regimes, and wider human–animal relationships (Ruscillo, 2015; Wilson et al, 1982)
Old English Gamecocks have long been highly prized by cockers for their “natural and irresistible passion for fighting” (Jull, 1927) and physique of a small stout body with long legs (Oxford Old English Game Fowl Club, 1920); important qualities for a successful fighting cock where agility and size are essential
Elliot pers. comm.), and it is likely that genetic factors are responsible for the lack of spur development in this individual

Summary

Introduction

Determining the age of animals represented within archaeological assemblages is essential for understanding hunting strategies, husbandry regimes, and wider human–animal relationships (Ruscillo, 2015; Wilson et al, 1982). While the aging of mammals has received much attention (e.g., Grant, 1982; Jones & Sadler, 2012; Moran & O'Connor, 1994; Popkin et al, 2012), methodologies for aging avian remains are less well developed. Ascertaining a bird's age antemortem is relatively straightforward: Most exhibit age-related variation in size, plumage, vocalizations, and social and sexual behavior Age estimations from skeletal remains are more challenging. Bird bones have a low number of fusion points after hatching (Hogg, 1980). Bird long bones possess no epiphyseal centers of ossification; instead, the whole epiphysis remains cartilaginous during growth (Silver, 1969)

Results

Discussion

Conclusion