144

News

Dogs ‘man’s best friend’ since the Stone Age

Stephen Gadd
January 18th, 2019


This article is more than 5 years old.

Studies of ancient animal bones indicate that men and dogs hunted together

Back then it might have looked just like these present-day Hadzbe returning from a hunt in Tanzania with their dogs (photo: Andreas Lederer)

Evidence shows that people in the Middle East, already as far back as 14,000 years ago, were starting to tame dogs. However, researchers are not sure whether this was by accident or design.

New research from the University of Copenhagen and University College London reveals that the use of dogs in hunting provides the best explanation for the major increase in the number of bones of small animals that they have excavated from Stone Age settlements in the Jordanian desert.

A symbiotic relationship
The animal bones discovered in the 11,500-year-old settlement of ‘Shubayqa 6’ reveal that not only were there a lot of dogs living in the area, but also that men and animals probably hunted together.

“Our study shows that a very large proportion of the bones show unmistakable signs of having passed through another animal’s digestive system,” said University of Copenhagen archaeologist Lisa Yeomans.

“These bones are so large that it is impossible that humans could have eaten them, so it must have been dogs,” she added.

The archaeologists think that the dogs have not lived on the periphery of the settlement but have been an integral part of daily life and have been allowed to move around freely.

“We can see that they’ve gnawed bones and excreted over the whole area,” said Yeomans.

Jugged hare anyone?
The archaeologists also noticed a sudden increase in the number of bones from hares at the same time that dogs made their entrance at Shubayqa 6, and they feel that there is a connection.

“We can see more hares have been caught, but also that the ones caught after the dogs came along are different. That could be connected with the introduction of new hunting techniques,” added Yeoman.

Previously, hares were hunted with nets, so both old and young ones were trapped, but with dogs it was possible to hunt exactly the type of hare one wanted to catch.


Share

Most popular

Subscribe to our newsletter

Sign up to receive The Daily Post

















Latest Podcast

A survey carried out by Megafon for TV2 has found that 71 percent of parents have handed over children to daycare in spite of them being sick.

Moreover, 21 percent of those surveyed admitted to medicating their kids with paracetamol, such as Panodil, before sending them to school.

The FOLA parents’ organisation is shocked by the findings.

“I think it is absolutely crazy. It simply cannot be that a child goes to school sick and plays with lots of other children. Then we are faced with the fact that they will infect the whole institution,” said FOLA chair Signe Nielsen.

Pill pushers
At the Børnehuset daycare institution in Silkeborg a meeting was called where parents were implored not to bring their sick children to school.

At Børnehuset there are fears that parents prefer to pack their kids off with a pill without informing teachers.

“We occasionally have children who that they have had a pill for breakfast,” said headteacher Susanne Bødker. “You might think that it is a Panodil more than a vitamin pill, if it is a child who has just been sick, for example.”

Parents sick and tired
Parents, when confronted, often cite pressure at work as a reason for not being able to stay at home with their children.

Many declare that they simply cannot take another day off, as they are afraid of being fired.

Allan Randrup Thomsen, a professor of virology at KU, has heavily criticised the parents’ actions, describing the current situation as a “vicious circle”.

“It promotes the spread of viruses, and it adds momentum to a cycle where parents are pressured by high levels of sick-leave. If they then choose to send the children to daycare while they are still recovering, they keep the epidemic going in daycares, and this in turn puts a greater burden on the parents.”