pigiere 2012 guinea pig

8/18/2019 Pigiere 2012 Guinea Pig

1/5

New archaeozoological evidence for the introduction of the guinea pig to Europe

Fabienne Pigière a,*, Wim Van Neer a,b, Cécile Ansieau c, Marceline Denis d

a Royal Belgian Institute of Natural Sciences, 29 Rue Vautier, B-1000 Brussels, Belgiumb Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Laboratory of Animal Biodiversity and Systematics, Ch. Debériotstraat 32, B-3000 Leuven, Belgiumc Service Public de Wallonie, DGO-4, Service de l’ Archéologie (Hainaut), Place du Béguinage 16, B-7000 Mons, Belgiumd Recherches et Prospections Archéologiques en Wallonie asbl, rue A. Jottard 19, B-5300 Andenne, Belgium

a r t i c l e i n f o

Article history:

Received 24 February 2011Received in revised form

23 November 2011

Accepted 25 November 2011

Keywords:

Archaeozoology

Cavia

Post-medieval times

Domestication

Stable isotopes

Social classes

a b s t r a c t

The remains are described of a guinea pig dated to the end of the 16th e beginning of the 17th c. AD. The

animal was discovered at a site in Mons,Belgium,and isthe rst European archaeozoologicalnd dated withcertainty on the basis of both the archaeological context and a radiocarbon dating of its bone. This nd

conrms that the guinea pig was introduced to Europe soon after the conquest of South America. Themorphological and metrical analyses performed on the skeletal remains are in agreement with the icono-

graphic and literary sources indicating the domestic status of the animals imported to Europe. Whilea previous discovery in England suggested that the guinea pig was a prestigious animal, the present studyargues that it was accessible to several classes of the population which may be related tothe rapid spread of

this prolic animal after its introduction in Europe.

2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Domestication of the guinea pig and its introduction

to Europe

The domestic guinea pig or cuy is a medium-sized rodent of theinfraorder Hystricognathi belonging to the Caviidae family which hasSouth American origins (Müller-Haye, 1984). The systematics of thegenus Cavia has recently been undergoing revision as the number of species occurring in the wild needed further clarication, as well asthe origin of the domesticated form (Woods, 2005). The commonlyheld view (Herre and Röhrs, 1990, 36) that the wild ancestor of theguinea pig is Cavia aperea, has been contradicted by recent molecularanalyses (Dunnum and Salazar-Bravo, 2010, 384; Spotorno et al.,2006, 2007). It is now believed that the most likely ancestor isCavia tschudii tschudii. According to the nomenclatural rules

proposed by Herre and Röhrs (1990) for the domestic animals, thedomestic guinea pig e described as Cavia porcellus by Linnaeus in1758 e should hence be labelled Cavia tschudii f. porcellus.

The current distribution of the wild ancestor includes coastal andhighland Peru, highland Bolivia, northern Chile, and northernArgentina. Molecular analysis shows that the populations of Cavia t.tschudii from the coastal region around Ica in Peru were the mostprobable sources for guinea pig domestication (Dunnum and Salazar-Bravo, 2010, 384). Archaeological data indicate that domestication

may havestarted inthe Andes asearly as5000 BC, andthatit was wellestablished there by 2500 BC (Morales, 1994, 130; Sandweiss andWing, 1997, 47). The animal was an important source of meat forthe Amerindian peoples (Morales, 1994), who also used them assacricial animals in religious ceremonies (Sandweiss and Wing,1997). When the Spaniards arrived in South America in the rsthalf of the 16th century, they found guinea pigs exhibiting the colourpolymorphism typical of the domestic form (Weir, 1974, 444).

The fast propagation of the domestic form is illustrated by thefact that, in 1547, Oviedomentioned the presencein Santo Domingoof an animal called ‘cori’, which appears to correspond to the guineapig (Cabrera, 1953, quoted by Müller-Haye, 1984, 255). Since theguinea pigs arenot indigenous to the Caribbean, the Spaniards musthave brought in the animals from Peru which they conquered in

1532. It is believed that the guinea pig was also introduced to Spainsoon after the conquest of Peru. Then, the animal would havequickly spread throughout Europe. The Swiss naturalist scientistKonrad Gesler described the guinea pig in his Historia Animaliumalready as early as 1554 (Benecke, 1994, 438). It is likely thatmultiple introductions occurredsince alsoDutch navigators seemtohave played a role in the import of the animal to Europe from the16th century AD onwards (Wagner and Manning, 1976, 2).

Archaeological data providing insight into the chronology of guinea pig introduction to Europeare still very rare. Thus far only twoarchaeological discoveries, both from England, have been reportedthatdo notrepresent recently buriedpets. A partial skeleton has been

* Corresponding author. Tel.: þ32 2 627 44 35; fax: þ 32 2 627 4113.

E-mail address: [email protected] (F. Pigière).

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Journal of Archaeological Science

j o u r n a l h o m e p a g e : h t t p : / / w w w . e l s e vi e r . c o m / l o c a t e / j a s

0305-4403/$ e see front matter 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

doi:10.1016/j.jas.2011.11.021

Journal of Archaeological Science 39 (2012) 1020e1024

mailto:[email protected]://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/03054403http://www.elsevier.com/locate/jashttp://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jas.2011.11.021http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jas.2011.11.021http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jas.2011.11.021http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jas.2011.11.021http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jas.2011.11.021http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jas.2011.11.021http://www.elsevier.com/locate/jashttp://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/03054403mailto:[email protected]


2/5

found at Hill Hall Manor in Essex, in what seems to be a contextsecurely dated e on the basis of the archaeological data e to aroundAD 1574-5 (Hamilton-Dyer, 2009, 346). The house was owned by SirThomas Smith, who held a high position at the court as the ambas-sador to France, suggesting that there is a relationship between thestatus of this householdand the presence of the guinea pig. A seconddiscovery, consisting of a maxilla and another skull fragment, hasbeen mentioned from an early 19th c. AD context at theRoyal LondonHospital (Morris, 2010). These remains are linked with the anatomyschool that was attached tothe hospital. We were unable totrace anyadditional Europeannds.The guineapig is not retained in ‘BoneInfo’,the Dutch system that gathers the scientic and grey archae-ozoological literature from The Netherlands (Lauwerier and de Vries,2004). The species is also absent from France according to an inquirymade to the ‘Inventaires archéozoologiques et archéobotaniques deFrance (I2AF)’ (Cécile Callou, pers. comm.; cf. Callou et al., 2011). Thusfar, no faunal remains seem to have been identied either in Spain(Arturo Morales, pers. comm.) or Portugal (Simon Davis, pers. com.).

2. Archaeological nds from the town of Mons

(Belgium, Hainaut)

In 2007, the archaeological heritage division of the ‘ServicePublic de Wallonie’, in collaboration with the association‘Recherches et Prospections archéologiques en Wallonie’, carriedout archaeological investigations prior to the construction of anunderground parking in the ‘rue Jean Lescarts’ in Mons (Fig.1). Theexcavations revealed a living quarter at the margin of the towncentre, dating from medieval times until today, with evidence forcommercial and artisanal activities in the neighbourhood (Ansieauand Denis, 2009). In the 16th and 17th centuries AD, an increasedurbanisation occurred and habitation by both middle and lowerclass can be observed: market halls, abbey shelters, notable’s resi-dences and modest houses coexist in the same sector (Regnard,2007; Denis, 2008). The contexts studied in this paper includehigh quality glassware and ceramics, which conrm that the

inhabitants of this domestic quarter belong to the middle class.In total, eight guinea pig bones have been discovered at this site

that can all have belonged to a single individual. All the bones comefrom the hand-collected assemblage; the sieved samples did notyield any additional material. Sixof thebones werefound in thellof a cellar while the remaining two came from an adjacent cess-pit. Thecess-pit was constructed after the cellar and partially dug into it. Theboundary between the two contexts was not always clear during theexcavation which explains why some material from the cellar mayhave ended up with the cess-pit material. It is most probable that allthe guinea pig bones originated from the cellar. The high quality of numerous artefacts discovered in these two contexts seems to indi-cate a quite privileged citizen: armorial sandstones, majolica table-ware, ‘façon de Venise’ glasses and painted stained-glass windows

were found. Based on thisarchaeologicalmaterial, a date to the endof the 16th e beginning of the 17th c. AD can be proposed for the ll inwhich the guinea pig remains were found. In order to conrm thedating of the remains of the animal, its left tibia was submitted forradiocarbon dating that yielded an age of 370 25BP(KIA-43023) orcal. AD 1440e1530 (57.8%) and AD 1550e1640 (37.6%). Since therange indicated by the rst peak can be rejected because it predatesthearrival of the Spaniards in Peru, theradiocarbon date corroboratesthe dating given by the archaeological context.

3. Identication, description and isotopic analysis of the

guinea pig from Mons

The identication of the guinea pig bones from Mons has been

carried out using the reference skeletons of the Royal Belgian

Institute of Natural Sciences (RBINS). In the cellar, part of the rightfore limb(scapula, humerus, radius,ulna) and both right and left tibiahave been discovered. All bones have their epiphyses fused and seem

to belong to the same adult individual (Fig. 2). A complete skull andthe right part of a pelvis with a similar state of preservation werepresent in the cess-pit and seem to come from the same individual.None of the bones show tracesof processing. Taking into account alsothe excellent state of preservation of the bones and the completenessof the various skeletal elements, these remains can be safelyconsidered to represent a carcass rather than food refuse.

Fig. 1. Location of the town of Mons and the excavated site.

Fig. 2. The partial skeleton of the guinea pig from Mons, Belgium. The scale bar is 1 cm.

F. Pigière et al. / Journal of Archaeological Science 39 (2012) 1020e1024 1021


3/5

The bone measurements have been taken according to themethods of von den Driesch (1976). The individual from Mons has

bone dimensions that are similar to those of a female adult domesticguinea pig from the modern reference collection (Table 1). Wing(1977,843e844)compared some skull characteristics of the domesticguinea pigand of the following wild taxa: Cavia tschudii, Cavia apereaand Cavia porcellus anolaimae. For each of them, the percentagefrequencies are listed of the type of naso-frontal suture (straight orM-shaped) and of the fronto-parietal suture (curved or straight), andthe presenceor absence of thepalatalspine is also indicated (Table2).In the archaeological specimen from Mons, the palatal spine isabsent, the shape of the fronto-parietal sutureis curvedand the naso-frontal suture is straight (Fig. 3). These traits allow to attribute theguinea pig from Mons to the domestic form (Table 2). A morpho-logical criterion that has been described for the pelvis to distinguishthe wildfromthe domesticform (IJzereef,1978,170)alsopointstothedomestic form. The notch of the ischium of the specimen from Monsis deeply hollowed as described for the domestic guinea pig and itsprole is similar to that of the domestic specimens of the RBINScollection. However, the reliability of this criterion has been ques-tioned by Brothwell (1983, 117), arguing that the inuence of sexual

dimorphism and pregnancy still needs to be evaluated on a largersample.

The following isotopic values were obtained for the bonecollagenof the cavia from Mons: d15N ¼ þ7.2&, d13C ¼ 22.5&, C/N ¼ 3.3.The d15N values fall in the lower range of Peruvian archaeologicalspecimens dating between the 6th and 16th c. AD (Finucane et al.,2006; Williams, 2005). The d13C values, however, differ signi-cantly (Fig. 4). Whereas the South American guinea pigs have highd13C values reecting a maize based diet, the specimen from Monsfalls in the range of C3 plant consumers. The carbon values arecomparable to those seen in the bone collagen of European hare(Lepus europaeus) from Neolithic sites in Europe (Bösl et al., 2006)and Anatolia (Lösch et al., 2006). The fact that the d15N values of theguinea pig from Mons are somewhat similar to those of the guineapigs from Peru and 15N-enriched compared to those of the harecould suggest that they had access to human food refuse.

The d13C isotopic values hence indicate that the guinea pig fromMons was locally raised andthat it does not represent an animal thatwas brought in directly from South America soon after which it died.Cavia are reputed for their great adaptability andit is no surprise thatthe animal could quickly establish itself in northern Europe given itsfast reproduction capacities. The animals reach sexual maturity at

about 3 months of age, and there is a short gestation period of about68 days (Rood and Weir, 1970).

4. Discussion

The remains of the guinea pig from the Rue Jean Lescarts site atMons conrm that the animal was introduced to Europe soon afterthe conquest of South America. It is therst European discovery thatcan be attributed with certainty to this older period on the basis of both the archaeological context and a direct radiocarbon dating of a skeletal element. As mentioned above, the body of the guinea pigwas deposited at the end of the 16the beginning of the 17th c. AD inthe backyard of a middle class residence. During the Renaissance, the

town of Mons bene

ted from an impressive town planning devel-opment and a relative prosperity due to local production of highquality items and commercial exchange (Piérard, 2006). It is possiblethat the increase of commercial activities and trade allowed a quiteprivileged population to acquire such exotic animals. The occurrenceof guinea pig in a late 16th century context of a manor at Hill Hall,Essex, owned by a member of the royal court, suggests that it wasa prestigious animal. However, thends from Mons indicate that themiddle class was also able to purchase guinea pigs, which could berelated to the rapid spread of thisprolic animal after its introductionin Europe, making it accessible to several classes of the population.

The early descriptions of guinea pig from Europe stronglyindicate that the Europeans took back with them the domestic formof the guinea pig and not the wild cavy. There are descriptions of animals with multi-coloured and white hair, which are typicaltraits of domestication (Weir, 1974, 444). Moreover, for the SpanishLow Countries, several depictions exist of guinea pigs with multi-coloured hair in the 17th c. paintings, as for example the Gardenof Eden (1610e1612) and the Entry of the Animals into Noah’s Ark

Table 2

Skull characteristics of the guinea pig from Mons compared to those of the domestic and wild taxa listed by Wing (1977).

Naso-frontal suture Fronto-parietal suture Palatal spine

% straight % M-shaped % curved % straight % absent % present

Domestic (n ¼ 9) 73 27 100 0 73 27

Cavia tschudii (n ¼ 40) 36 64 26 74 68 32

Cavia porcellus anolaimae (n ¼ 15) 7 93 23 77 0 100

Cavia aperea (n ¼ 9) 0 100 12 88 33 67Mons X X X

Table 1

Measurements(in mm)on theskulland post-cranialelementsof theguinea pigfrom

Mons compared to those of a female, domestic specimen from the RBINS modern

collection. The measuring distances are those dened by von den Driesch (1976).

Mons 98083M01

Skull 1 63.8 65.5

3 57.5 59.0

4 36.1 e

9 16.2 16.913 24.6 27.9

Scapula HS (37.1) 37.0SLC 4.9 4.9

GLP 8.0 7.6

LG 6.5 6.1

BG 5.0 4.6

Humerus GL 38.1 39.4

GLC 37.0 38.0

Bp 8.0 9.0

Dp 9.5 9.9

SD 3.1 3.2

Bd 7.8 7.2

Radius GL 31.1 30.6

Bp 4.9 4.4

SD 2.5 2.3

Bd 5.1 4.8

Ulna GL 40.0 39.0

SDO 4.2 4.1

DPA 4.1 4.9

Pelvis SC 5.0 5.1

LAR 6.1 5.9

Tibia GL 46.9 47.5

Bp 9.0 9.8

SD 3.0 3.1Bd 5.5 5.8

F. Pigière et al. / Journal of Archaeological Science 39 (2012) 1020e10241022


4/5

(1613), both by Jan Brueghel the Elder. The morphological and

metrical analyses performed on the guinea pig skeleton from Monsare in agreement with a domestic status of the animal. At the sametime, the precise identication of the founder lineage of the Euro-pean guinea pig has not yet been established (Spotorno et al., 2006,61). Molecularanalysis on European specimens from post-medievalarchaeological sites has the potential of providing information onthe founder population(s) in Europe, albeit that the number of specimens for analysis is still very small.

As to the reasons why guinea pigs were introduced to Europe atthat early period, it has been postulated that they were kept forentertainment and as pets and that the species was not widelyadopted asa sourceof food inEurope, aswas thecasein many parts of the Spanish colonial empire (Wagner and Manning, 1976, 2).However, the French agronomist O. de Serres mentioned in his book‘Théâtre d’agriculture’, written in 1563, that the ‘connins d’Inde’exported from Brazil were raised for consumption (Delaunay, 1962).He also indicated that spices need to be added to improve theavourof the guinea pig meat. Thus far, no archaeological indication for theconsumption of guinea pig has been found in Europe. The individualfrom Mons and that from Hill Hall, Essex, were carcasses and it islikely that these animals were kept as pets or curiosities. The ndfromthe LondonHospital,dated of the early 19thc. AD, seems tohavecome from theanatomy schoolattached to thehospital andtherefore,resulted of a very specic activity (Morris, 2010). It was discovered inthe graves area, where dissected human and animal remains wereburied. Many of the skeletons from various animal speciesdiscoveredin this zone display knife and saw marks resulting of thedissection of the corpses.

Finds that have been reported in South America include burialsand ritual deposits, but the archaeological visibility is low in sites

where the cavia is supposed to have been a common food item(Valdez and Valdez, 1997). The low number of nds in Europeancontexts may be partly due to the fact that the guinea pig is ananimal with relatively small bones that can only be expected to befound in post-medieval contexts, which in most European coun-tries still receive less attention in terms of the recoveryand study of archaeozoological material.

Acknowledgements

The present research wascarried out with thenancial support of the ‘Service de l’Archéologie’ du Service public de Wallonie (DGO4).The contribution of Wim Van Neer to this paper presents researchresults of the Interuniversity Attraction Poles Programme e Belgian

Science Policy. We would like to thank the following colleagues forproviding information: Umberto Albarella (University of Shef eld),Cécile Callou (Muséum National d’Histoire Naturelle, Paris), SimonDavis (IGESPAR-UNIARQ, Universidade de Lisboa) and ArturoMorales-Muniz (Universidad Autonoma de Madrid). The linedrawing was made by Anne-Marie Wittek (ADIA-RBINS).

References

Ansieau, C., Denis, M., 2009. Fouilles préventives d’une parcelle sise à Mons, rue Jean Lescarts ( Ht.). Archaeologia Mediaevalis 32, 81e84.

Benecke, N., 1994. Der Mensch und Seine Haustiere. Die Geschichte Einer Jahrtau-sendealten Beziehung. Konrad Theiss Verlag, Stuttgart.

Bösl, C., Grupe, G., Peters, J., 2006. A Late Neolithic vertebrate food web based onstable isotope analyses. International Journal of Osteoarchaeology 16, 296e315.

Brothwell, D., 1983. Why on earth the guinea-pig? In: Proudfoot, B. (Ed.), Site,

Environment and Economy. BAR International Series, Oxford, pp. 115e

119.Callou, C., Baly, I., Gargominy, O., Rieb, E., 2011. National inventory of natural

heritage website. Recent, historical, and archaeological data. The SAA Archae-ological Record 11 (1), 37e40.

Delaunay, P., 1962. La Zoologie au seizième siècle. Hermann, Paris.Denis, M., 2008. Fouille archéologique préventive. Mons, rue Jean Lescarts, Rapport

interne inédit pour le Service public de Wallonie (DG04), 70 pp.Dunnum, J.L., Salazar-Bravo, J., 2010. Molecular systematics, taxonomy and bioge-

ography of the genus Cavia (Rodentia: Caviidae). Journal of ZoologicalSystematics and Evolutionary Research 48 (4), 376e388.

Finucane,B., Maita Agurto,P.,Isbell, W.H.,2006.Human andanimal dietat Conchopata,Peru: stable isotope evidence for maize agriculture and animal managementpractices during the Middle Horizon. Journal of Archaeological Science 33,1766e1776.

Hamilton-Dyer, S., 2009. Animal bones. In: Dury, P., Simpson, R. (Eds.), Hill Hall; ASingular House Devised by a Tudor Intellectual. Society of Antiquaries/EHmonograph, London, pp. 345e351.

Herre, W., Röhrs, M., 1990. Haustiere e Zoologisch Gesehen. Gustav Fischer Verlag,

Stuttgart, New York.

Fig. 4. Carbon and nitrogen isotope ratio results of the guinea pig of Mons compared to

those of Conchopata (AD 550e1000; Finucane et al., 2006) and Puruchuco-

Huaquerones (15e16th c. AD; Williams, 2005). The values for hare were obtained

from late Neolithic Pestenacker (Bösl et al., 2006) and early Neolithic Nevalı Çori (Lösch

et al., 2006).

Fig. 3. Dorsal view of the skull of the guinea pig from Mons showing the curved fronto-

parietal suture (a) and the straight naso-frontal suture (b).

F. Pigière et al. / Journal of Archaeological Science 39 (2012) 1020e1024 1023


5/5

IJzereef, G.F., 1978. Faunal remains from El Abra rock shelters (Colombia).Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 25, 163e177.

Lauwerier, R.C.G.M., de Vries, L.S., 2004. Lifting the Iceberg. BoneInfo and the battleto save archaeological information. In: Lauwerier, R.C.G.M., Plug, I. (Eds.), TheFuture from the Past. Archaeozoology in Wildlife Conservation and HeritageManagement. Oxbow books, Oxford, pp. 167e175.

Lösch, S., Grupe, G., Peters, J., 2006. Stable isotopes and dietary adaptations inhumans and animals at pre-pottery Neolithic Nevalı Çori, southeast Anatolia.American Journal of Physical Anthropology 131, 181e193.

Morales, E., 1994. The guinea pig in the Andean economy: from household animal to

market commodity. Latin American Research Review 29 (3), 129e

142.Morris, J., 2010. Explorations in Anatomy; the Faunal Remains from the Royal

London Hospital », in BoneCommons Item #1402. http://alexxandrieaarchive.org/bonecommons/items/show/1402 (accessed 14.10.10.).

Müller-Haye, B., 1984. Guinea-pig or cuy. In: Mason, I.L. (Ed.), Evolution of Domesticated Animals. Longman, London, New York, pp. 252e257.

Piérard, Ch, 2006. Mons au l des siècles, La ville du VIIe siècle à 1861. In:Isaac, M.Th. (Ed.), Images de Mons en Hainaut du XVI e au XIXe siècle 121e132.

Regnard, M., 2007. Rapport historique des fouilles de la rue Jean Lescarts à Mons.Première phase: 1700e1816, Rapport interne inédit pour le Service public deWallonie (DG04), 10 pp.

Rood, J.P., Weir, B.J., 1970. Reproduction in female wild guinea-pigs. Journal of Reproduction and Fertility 23, 393e409.

Sandweiss, D.H., Wing, E., 1997. Ritual rodents: the guinea pigs of Chincha, Peru. Journal of Field Archaeology 24 (1), 47e58.

Spotorno, A.E., Marín, J.C., Manríquez, G., Valladares, J.P., Rico, E., Rivas, C., 2006.Ancient and modern steps during the domestication of guinea pigs(Cavia porcellus L.). Journal of Zoology 270 (1), 57e62.

Spotorno, A.E., Manriquez, G., Fernandez, L.A., Marín, J.C., Gonzalez, F., Wheeler, J.,2007. Domestication of guinea pigs from a southern Peru-northern Chile wildspecies and their middle Pre-Columbian mummies. In: Kelt, D.A., Lessa, E.P.,Salazar-Bravo, J., Patton, J.L. (Eds.), The Quintessential Naturalist: Honoring theLife and Legacy of Oliver P.P. Pearson. Univ Cal Pubs Zool, Berkeley, Los Angeles,and London, pp. 1e981.

Valdez, L.M., Valdez, J.E., 1997. Reconsidering the archaeological rarity of guinea pig

bones in the Central Andes. Current Anthropology 38, 896e

898.von den Driesch, A., 1976. A guide to the measurements of animal bones from

archaeological sites. Peabody Museum Bulletin 1, 1e137.Wagner, J.,Manning,P.,1976. TheBiologyof theGuineaPig. AcademicPress,New York.Weir, B.J., 1974. Notes on the origin of guinea-pig. In: Rowlands, I.W., Weir, B.J.

(Eds.). The Biology of Hystricomorph Rodents, vol. 34. Symposia of theZoological Society of London, pp. 437e446.

Williams, J.S., 2005. Investigating diet and dietary change using the stable isotopesof carbon and nitrogen in mummied tissues from Puruchuco-Huaquerones,Peru. Doctoral thesis, University of Calgary.

Wing, E., 1977. Animal domestication in the Andes. In: Reed, C.A. (Ed.), Origins of Agriculture. Mouton Publishers, The Hague, pp. 837e859.

Woods, C., 2005. Suborder Hystricognathi. In: Wilson, D.E., Reeder, D.M. (Eds.),Mammal Species of the World: A Taxonomic and Geographic Reference. Smith-sonian Institution Press, Washington D.C., pp. 771e806.

F. Pigière et al. / Journal of Archaeological Science 39 (2012) 1020e10241024
http://alexxandrieaarchive.org/bonecommons/items/show/1402http://alexxandrieaarchive.org/bonecommons/items/show/1402http://alexxandrieaarchive.org/bonecommons/items/show/1402http://alexxandrieaarchive.org/bonecommons/items/show/1402

pigiere 2012 guinea pig

Documents