This book considers the nature of the interaction between birds and hunter-gatherers in Western Europe. It examines aspects of avian behaviour and the qualities targeted at different periods by hunter-gatherers, who recognised the utility of the diversity of avian groups in various applications of daily life and thought.

• Cover
• Title Page
• Copyright page
• Dedication
• Contents Page
• List of Figures
• Preface
• Preface
• Chapter 1
• Some aspects of bird life during the Palaeolithic of western Europe
  • Table 1. Some examples of the records of Summer visitors to western Europe during the Upper Palaeolithic with reference to Tyreberg 1998 and Moreau 1972.
  • Table 1. Continued.
  • Table 2. Some pelagic species recovered from Palaeolithic occupation sites in western Europe.
  • Table 2. Continued.
  • Table 3. Some of the freshwater waterfowl species recorded as wintering outside their recent range in western Europe on Palaeolithic sites.
  • Table 3. Continued.
  • Table 4. Plant species known to be taken by the Wildfowl species represented in the Mousterian deposits at Pontnewydd cave. A. platyrhyncos, Mallard is omnivorous and omitted from this list (after Cramp Vol. I. 1977) (Spr. Taken in Spring; S. Takin in Su
  • Table 4. Continued.
  • Table 5. Mollusca, Crustacea, invertebrates and fish known to be taken by Wildfowl species whose remains are recorded in the Mousterian deposits at Pontnewydd Cave (after Cramp Vol. I. 1977) (S. Taken in Summer; W. Taken in Winter; All Taken at all sea
  • Table 5. Continued.
  • Table 6, A range of plant foodstuffs taken by Tetraornidae at different times of year (Spr. Taken in Spring; S. Takin in Summer; A. Taken in Autumn; W, Taken in Winter; All. Taken at all seasons; Occ. Taken occasionally).
  • Table 7. Some of the invertebrates taken seasonally by Tertraornidae (Spr. Taken in Spring; S. Takin in Summer; Occ. Taken occasionally; Chicks. Fed to neonatal young).
  • Table 8. The presence of Crossbills and Pine grosbeak on Palaeolithic sites in western, central and Mediterranean Europe (after Tyreberg 1998).
• Chapter 2
• Birds of the Middle Palaeolithic in Britain and western Europe
  • Table 1. Summary of the birds recorded at Eartham quarry 1 and 2 at Boxgrove Sussex, after Harrison and Stewart 1999, as compared with E and W Runton and Ostend, Norfolk, after Harrison.
  • Table 2. The Avifauna at Pontnewydd cave, Clwyd.
  • Table 3. Mousterian avifaunas noted from excavations at Pinhole cave Derbyshire, Soldier’s Hole Somerset and La Cotte de St Brelade, Jersey. After Bramwell, Harrison and Callow and Cornford.
  • Table 3. Continued.
  • Table 4. Mousterian avifauna from excavations at Buhlen Upper cave.
  • Table 5. A comparison between bird faunas from Mousterian levels La Baume de Gigny, Fontechevade, Combe Grenal and Pech de l’Aze. (After Berlioz 1959 and Mourer Chauviré 1975).
  • Table 5. Continued.
  • Table 5. Continued.
  • Table 6. Mousterian avifaunas from Herault, the Pyrenees, and Cantabria (after Mourer Chauviré Clot, Elorza and Eastham).
  • Table 6. Continued.
  • Table 6. Continued.
  • Table 7. Cova Negra de Bellus; the distribution of bird bones by level, with the numbers of bones of each species recovered. Levels XIV – X represents the stages of the cold period of Weuchselian I and levels IX – I represent the stages of Weichselian I
  • Table 7. Continued.
  • Table 8. Mousterian avifauna from Gibraltar and Zafarraya after Cooper and Eastham 1967; Bate 1928; Cooper and Eastham 1988.
  • Table 8. Continued.
  • Table 9. Avian distribution in Italy: Grotta Del Principe (after Mourer Chauviré 1975) Torre in Pietra (after Cassoli 1978), Ripari de Fumane (after Cassoli and Tagliacozzo 1994), Frosinone lake beds (after Segre, Biddittu and Cassoli 1984), and Torre N
  • Table 9. Continued.
  • Table 9. Continued.
• Chapter 3
• The Upper Palaeolithic in western Europe
  • Table 1. A comparison of bird faunas on a sample of Aurignacian sites in Hungary, Croatia and Italy. Notes on stratigraphy and C14 dating BP: Instállósko – A1 = Aurignacian 1, 39,700 ± 900 – 44,300 ± 1900 A2=Aurignacian 2 30,900 t0 ± 31,540 ± 600 BP, Aur
  • Table 1. Continued.
  • Table 1. Continued.
  • Table 1. Continued.
  • Table 2. Bird faunas from Le Flageolet I, after (Delpech 1975, 1983), L’Abri Pataud, after (Bouchud 1975) and La Ferrassie, after (Delpech 1975, 1983; Mourer Chauviré 1984).
  • Table 2. Continued.
  • Table 3. Bird faunas from sites in Languedoc, Catalonia and Guipuzcoa: Salpêtrière and Arbreda (after Vilette 1983), Castillo (after Cabrera 1984), Amalda (after Eastham 1990).
  • Table 3. Continued.
  • Table 3. Continued.
  • Table 4. Aurignacian avifaunas from Mallaetes (after Eastham 1980) and Gorham’s cave (after Eastham 1964).
  • Table 5. A comparison of bird faunas from Gravettian and Solutrean sites in Languedoc, Valencia, Oviedo and Liguria (after Vilette 1983; Eastham 2017; Cardini 1946 and Cassoli 1980).
  • Table 5. Continued.
  • Table 5. Continued.
  • Table 6. A comparison between Middle Magdalenian bird faunas from the Bois de Brousse and Grotte Gazel (after Vilette 1983) Aitzbitare IV (Eastham 1985), Abri Dufaure (after Eastham in Straus 1995) and Le Maz d’Azil (after Vilette 1983).
  • Table 6. Continued.
  • Table 7. A selection of late Magdalenian avian assemblages from sites in Western Europe: Petersfels after Mourer Chauviré et al. 1983; Dufaure after Eastham 1985; Bourrouilla after Eastham 2000; Isturitz after Bouchud 1952; Matutano after Eastham 1999;
  • Table 7. Continued.
  • Table 7. Continued.
• Chapter 4
• The bird catcher, fowling techniques down the ages
  • Figure 1. Whistle that imitates the calls of ducks, from Segovia 2005.
  • Figure 2. Multiple noose for trapping thrushes and small birds, from Blome 1686.
  • Figure 4. Basic flat net to drop down from the vertical or drag along the ground, from Blome 1686.
  • Figure 3. Thrushes caught in a noose, Mosaic in the Musée du Bardo, El Djem, Tunisia. Photo: R.G.A. Wilson Vancouver.
  • Figure 5. Clap net, from Blome 1686.
  • Figure 7. Tunnel nets for drawing wildfowl into a trap, either led by a dog or by being driven, from Blome 1686.
  • Figure 6. Coot net for catching small wildfowl, from Blome 1686.
  • Figure 8. An owl decoy trap, from Blome 1686.
  • Figure 9. Misericord at Gloucester Cathedral depicting an owl being mobbed by small birds. Photo: Eastham.
  • Figure 10. Mosaic in the Musée d’el Djem, Tunisia, showing an owl being attacked by thrushes. Photo: R.J.A. Wilson, Vancouver.
  • Figure 12. Painting of harvesting barley in the tomb of Hesi, Saqqara and taking partridges in a net, a device that almost exactly matches that illustrated by Blome in 1686 AD.
  • Figure 13. Tomb of Hesi and his wife fowling in the marshes, drawing after Kanawati and Abder-Raziq 1999.
  • Figure 11. The tomb of Ymery first chamber painting of cranes, drawing after K.R. Weeks 1994.
  • Figure 14. The tomb of Hesi, Saqqara, hunting with a clap net, drawing after Kanawati and Abder-Raziq 1999.
  • Figure 15. Hunting in the marshes in the tomb of Nacht, Thebes. Photo: Eastham.
  • Figure 1. Map showing sites referred to in the text.
• Chapter 5
• Bird images in the parietal art of Palaeolithic France and Spain
  • Figure 2. Chauvet cave, Horned owl drawn in the clay in the Salle Hilaire. Photo: courtesy J. Clottes.
  • Figure 3. The ‘Papillon’ at Chauvet cave. Photo: courtesy J. Clottes.
  • Figure 4. Great auk figures at Cosquer cave. Photo: courtesy J. Clottes.
  • Figure 5. Snowy owl engraving at les Trois Frères. Photo: courtesy R. Bégouen.
  • Figure 6. Engraving of the ‘faisan’. Photo: courtesy of R. Bégouen.
  • Figure 7. Les Trois Frères, detail of head and of neck ‘Phaisan’. Photo: courtesy R. Bégouen.
  • Figure 8. Les Trois Frères, ‘Phaisan’ Detail of tail feathers. Photo: courtesy R. Bégouen.
  • Figure 9a. Aquatic bird at Gargas, after Barrière 1976.
  • Figure 9b. Passerine engraving at Gargas, after Barrière 1976.
  • Figure 10. La Bastide, engraving of a goose, Omnes 1982.
  • Figure 11. Bird picking insects from the rump of a bovid. Drawing after Appellaniz. Photo: courtesy J. Altuna.
  • Figure 12. Drawings by H. Breuil 1908, I. Barandiaran 1980, and Eastham 1968 of the auks at El Pendo.
  • Figure 13. Lascaux, bird headed man and staff. Photo: CNP N. Aujoulat.
  • Figure 14. Cougnac, outlines suggesting the profiles of flying birds, with the wounded man. Photo: courtesy M. Lorblanchet.
  • Figure 15. Roucadour, engraving of duck headed horse. Drawing: courtesy M. Lorblanchet.
  • Figure 16. Roucadour, bird headed quadruped. Drawing: courtesy M. Lorblanchet.
  • Figure 17. Duck engraving at the cave of Escabasses. Tracing courtesy M. Lorblanchet.
  • Figure 18. Roc de Sers, Low relief carving of a grouse.
  • Figure 19. Church Hole cave, Derbyshire, engraved bird. Photo: Alun Bull at English Heritage and Creswell Heritage Trust.
• Chapter 6
• Bird images in Palaeolithic portable art
  • Figure 1. Map showing the approximate location of sites discussed in the text.
  • Figure 2. Ivory figures of an aquatic bird in flight from Hohlefels in Swabia. Photo: N. Conard, University of Tubingen Museum.
  • Figure 3. La Vache, Initiation scene MAN 83. 349 Clottes and Delporte 2003.
  • Figure 4. La Vache, Seals/salmon and fishes MAN 88 12.
  • Figure 5. Engraved ulna from El Valle, Museo Provincial de Prehistoria Santander.
  • Figure 6. El Torre frieze, drawing: Barandiaran 1971. Photo: J. Altuna.
  • Figure 8. Engraving of a grouse on reindeer antler from Isturitz, MAN No 74851. Photo: Eastham.
  • Figure 7. Arancou, long-necked bird engraved on avian ulna.
  • Figure 9. Bird perched on the rump of a quadruped at the Grotte de Bourrouilla. Photo: Carole Fritz CNRS.
  • Figure 10. ‘Sceptre’ from La Vache, MAN 83 346.
  • Figure 11. Limeuil and Teyjat, barbed images carved on calcite and stone.
  • Figure 12. Harpoon designs from Duruthy after Arambourou 1978.
  • Figure 13. Spear thrower from Enlène. Musée de l’Homme 55 53 3. Photo by Romain Pigeaud and drawing: H. Breuil and Claire Belllier.
  • Figure 14. Spear thrower from Le Mas d’Azil. Photo: A. Alteirac.
  • Figure 15. La Vache 83 363, Crane image on a bone chisel.
  • Figure 16. Antler baton from Laugerie Basse, J.-J. Cleyet Merle and Madelaine, S. 1995 MNP no 620. Photo: P.H. Jugie.
  • Figure 17. Bone plaque with engraving of a long necked bird and a pebble on which the birds may be seen as a pair with necks entwined BM Nos 637 and 671, after Seiveking 1987.
  • Figure 18. La Bastide crane engraving.
  • Figure 19. Diver carving from Ekain. Photo: J. Altuna.
  • Figure 20. Short sections of engraved avian bone used as beads for personal ornament. MNP, Les Eyzies. Photo: courtesy Ph. Jugie.
  • Figure 21. Engraved ulna from the site of Raymonden, MAAP no. F 469.
  • Figure 22. Raymonden Pendant. Drawing: Eastham. MAAP no. 2104.
  • Figure 23. Drawing Eastham. Photo: PH, Jugie MNP.
  • Figure 24. Caprid and bird pendant Raymonden. MAAP no. F475.
  • Figure 25. Head of a duck at Raymonden. Photo: MAAP no. 2099.
  • Figure 26. Passerine bird on a limestone plaque from Limeuil on the Dordogne, MAN no. 56751-55. After Capitan and Bouyssonie 1924 and Tosello 2003.
  • Figure 27. Sandstone plaque from Le Puy de Lacan. Photo: Musée Labenche, Brive.
  • Figure 28. Crane ulna. Photo: Argentomagus Museum St Marcel.
  • Figure 29. La Garenne bone pendant with birds flying across the face.
  • Figure 30. Owl/man la Marche. L. Pales 1969.
  • Figure 31. Gönnersdorf. A selection of aquatic birds drawn on pieces of schist, courtesy G. Bosinski.
  • Figure 32. Corvids, Blackcock and Crane from Gönnersdorf corvids and a crane, courtesy G. Bosinski.
• Chapter 7
• Avian resources in hunter-gatherer communities
  • Figure 2. The application of pigment by mouth.
  • Figure 1. Applying paint using a blowpipe.
  • Figure 3. Hohlefels flute. Photo: N. Conard, University of Tubingen.
  • Figure 4. Bone sewing needles of varying dimensions at the Abri Duruthy, after Arambourou 1978.
  • Figure 5. Yupi’k mask, Good News Bay, Alaska.
  • Figure 6. Branly Mask, Louvre Museum.
  • Figure 7. Kula dance feather masks. Mount Hagen, New Guinea. Photos: courtesy M. Strathern 1971 and Downing Street Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology.
  • Figure 8. Female headdress for the Kula of Mount Hagen.
• Chapter 8
• Case study: snowy owls at the Grotte de Bourrouilla at Arancou, Atlantic Pyrenees
  • Figure 1. Location map for the Grotte de Bourrouilla, Arancou, after Eastham.
  • Table 1. Cumulative totals of snowy owl bones in level US 2007, and record of laterality.
  • Figure 2. General plan of the cave, after Dachary and Plassard.
  • Table 2. Grotte de Bourrouilla at Arancou: the distribution of Snowy owl bones, level US 2007, by sector.
  • Figure 3. Distribution if snowy owl bone in excavated sectors and in the clandestine area.
  • Figures 4, a, b, c and d plot the distribution of body parts across the cave.
  • Table 3. Worked bone showing cut marks, burns and scraping, C, B, and R, mainly for severing joint or removal of flesh.
  • Table 4. Small rodent remains on sites in Aquitaine associated with significant numbers of snowy owls.
  • Figure 5. Photograph of male snowy owl taken at the breeding station Le Rocher des Aigles, Rocamadour (photo: Eastham).
  • Figure 6. Photograph of female snowy owl taken at the breeding station Le Rocher des Aigles, Rocamadour (photo: Eastham).
  • Figure 7. Photograph of head of snowy owl taken at the breeding station Le Rocher des Aigles, Rocamadour (photo: Eastham).
  • Figure 8. Circumpolar distribution of the snowy owl at the present day.
• Index of sites used in tables
• Index of bird species mentioned in the tables of Chapters 1-3
• References
• Acknowledgements