Abstract
Over the past several decades archaeologists have used the spinal pathology spondylosis deformans as an indicator that archaeological dogs were used to pull or carry loads. This interpretive approach is largely based upon observations of prehistoric dog remains and archaeologist’s interpretations of veterinary literature on recent sled dogs and other draft animals. However, no comparative large-scale studies of the occurrence of spondylosis deformans in wild canids, transport dogs, and dogs never involved in pulling or carrying loads have been published. To evaluate the reliability of spondylosis deformans in archaeological dogs as an indicator of participation in transport activities, 136 modern non-transport dogs, 19 sled dogs, and 241 wolves were systematically analyzed for the occurrence of spondylosis deformans. Our results indicate this pathology is not a reliable skeletal indicator of dog transport because the disease is prevalent in both dogs and wolves, regardless of their occupational histories. Numerous factors correlate with the occurrence and manifestation of this disease in canids, including age, body size, sex, and inbreeding. As such, it remains extremely challenging to identify specific etiologies for spondylosis deformans in archaeological specimens.
Highlights
Humans and dogs have engaged in a wide variety of working relationships
Spondylosis deformans was prevalent in dogs, regardless of their use in transport activities (Table 1)
Nontransport dogs were affected with spondylosis deformans at a slightly higher frequency than sled dogs (66.18% vs. 63.16%, respectively), but the differences between the two groups were not significant (X2 = 0.08, p = 0.6231)
Summary
Humans and dogs have engaged in a wide variety of working relationships. Dogs have pulled and carried loads in many parts of the world, including much of the circumpolar North, the Great Plains of North America, and southern Europe [1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9]. Given the widespread distribution of dog transport activities and their significant roles in some societies, there is reason to suspect that dogs were involved in similar working relationships with humans in the past. These relationships are difficult to interpret archaeologically because there is little unambiguous artifactual evidence of dog transport. Many of the technologies involved (harnesses, sleds) were likely constructed of perishable materials and unlikely to be preserved in many archaeological settings.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
