On Apr 11, 2011, at 3:11 PM, Sean Doyle wrote:
> That is an interesting story about the Mule team, if not morbidly
> humorous. I understand that the disposable income was sparse, and still
> is amongst farmers, but I was referencing an apparent trend I have
> noticed. Working dogs seem to be afforded more attention than draught
> animals. This is interesting to me for a couple of reasons. 1) The trend
> of commemorating working dogs are all in a pastoralist type context,
> whereas there doesn't seem to be a similar activity with
> agriculturalists;
That's counter to my direct experience. Hunting dogs (work dogs) in the South are dual use: family pets and work dogs and get the full treatment at burial, IF the tendency is there in the first place. Again, folks with disposable income who hunt ducks, geese, birds, rabbits, squirrels and perhaps deer (deer dogs are not typically accorded pet status) would be inclined to commemorate their hunting companions.
> 2) The level of time and monetary investment in a
> draught animal, as well as the amount of discernable return in labor
> value (e.g. how much value that farmer places on the animal) is
> equivalent if not higher with draught animals, what's more many farmer's
> have a similar personal relationship with their draught animals that one
> would have with their dog, so why not treat their death in the same way?
They do have a personal relationship, but it's an "at distance" type wherein the animal is for work and not accorded the same status as a working animal that probably spent time at the hearth with the owner. A draught animal works fully from the earliest time it's able to the point where the ability of the animal to work has to be measured against the cost of upkeep and replacement. At that point, sentimentality is not in the equation. Off to the knacker's yard for whatever can be got for it is what happens. Perhaps a brief moment of remembrance and thence to replacement. I would suggest that consigning a living animal to be rendered into glue and parts causes the distance.
With any hunting culture, you simply cannot view the animals with sentimentality as they are destined for the table so one shuts one's self off from that and does what is necessary. As a case in point, we were once over run with deer and my instructions were to blast any deer I saw. Well, I did see and i could not because I wasn't going to eat it and therefore could not create that wall between us. Hunting season: different story.
> Moreover, the shepherd dog is intrinsic to the livelihood of the
> pastoralist in the same way a Shire would be to a Potato Farmer. I have
> seen people cry when their car dies, let along the Horse you need to
> survive. A dead or ill draught horse for a small scale, lower income
> farmer would be financially devastating.
That's true but not the point.
> It seems to me it is a simple
> matter of marking the grave, or better yet, the size of the animal makes
> burials a bit more difficult.
Again true, but it is the individual relationship that's crucial, not generalizations. Some folks do, some don't. But all people who have pets, work dogs, work animals and whatnot have to deal with it, whether they commemorate or not. I'd suspect those who do are the minority.
>
>
> As far as disposable income is concerned, all of the animal burials I
> have seen were within the property and utilized opportunistic materials,
> i.e. nearby stones, wooden storage boxes, or a wall cladding board so
> there was not a high level of monetary investment involved in the
> burial. Basically just a plank or stone set at the presumed head of the
> burial.
Again, I've seen concrete grave markers in an area set aside for horse burials, but these were minor league horse people, not major breeders.
Lyle Browning, RPA
>
> Sean M.A. Doyle, B.A.
>
>
>
> Historic Resources Specialist
>
> SWCA Environmental Consultants
>
> 295 Interlocken Blvd. Suite 300
>
> Broomfield, CO. 80021
> 303-487-1183 x.149
> -----Original Message-----
> From: HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Lyle
> E. Browning
> Sent: Monday, April 11, 2011 12:15 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: University archaeologists start Tregaron elephant dig
>
> On Apr 11, 2011, at 1:43 PM, Sean Doyle wrote:
>
>> In the cases where they went so far as to identify the markers they
> only had the name, Demon, Runner, and what not. No indication of species
> or capacity on the marker. I wonder why the same treatment was not
> afforded draught animals in agriculturalist sites I've had the
> opportunity to work on?
> Beef and dairy operations in VA have a designated area where natural
> loss animals are hauled for "open-air" burials. These are invariably in
> ravines at the margins of the pasture and in an intermittent drainage.
> That said, half a mile downwind in the summer the odor is noticeable and
> within a quarter mile it is sickening. VA has two seasons; winter and
> July so the decomp season is March to November with frozen or nearly so
> in between in the higher elevations.
>
> Draught animals often did get burials, but not with markers. The farmers
> knew where they were and used the area as needed. One such situation was
> related in that a team of mules used to haul freight in wagon to the
> steamboats for riverine transport would not stop backing up and went
> over the end of the dock into the Pamunkey River. The crop was lost as
> were the animals. A pit was dug by hand and the animals were rolled in.
> The last one rolled in and came to rest with legs up. Alterations were
> made with a chainsaw to allow dirt to cover the multiple grave. No other
> markers exist. This happened about 80 years ago and is still current
> with the great-grandchildren of the folks to which it happened.
> Ethnohistory would undoubtedly relate more of same.
>
> I have encountered horse "graveyards" with markers with the name and
> dates. It would appear that the farther down the status ladder the
> animal, the less likely it was to be commemorated. And it would have
> much to do with the economic means and mindset of the owners.
> Commemoration in cement is more prevalent in agrarian sites than
> formalized tombstones. One has to remember that most of these animals
> were working animals, and not household pets. The distinction is
> important when disposable income is scarce on farming profit margins.
>
> Lyle Browning, RPA
>
>
>>
>> Susan Walter <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>
>> Very true.
>> I have thought of visiting one of our local pet cemeteries; not yet
> made a
>> big enough excuse to do so. Just wondering if a working dog would
> have been
>> marked as such on his/her marker.
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Sean Doyle" <[log in to unmask]>
>> To: <[log in to unmask]>
>> Sent: Monday, April 11, 2011 10:07 AM
>> Subject: Re: University archaeologists start Tregaron elephant dig
>>
>>
>> The one's in Western Colorado varied between fieldstone and wooden
> markers.
>> East Texas on the other hand were invariably of stone, at least of the
>
>> examples I have seen. We did in fact know they were dogs as in all
> three
>> cases the landowners explained the burials to us.
>>
>> I wanted to add that I should have said "working dogs" instead of
> simply
>> hunting dogs. The Colorado examples were located in the Piceance and
> were
>> intermixed with sheep dogs. They always fascinated me, good
> representations
>> of how much the human relied on and trusted this animal during its
> lifetime.
>> As much a colleague as a pet.
>>
>> Susan Walter <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>
>> With fieldstones?
>> Did you know they were dogs?
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Sean Doyle" <[log in to unmask]>
>> To: <[log in to unmask]>
>> Sent: Monday, April 11, 2011 9:02 AM
>> Subject: Re: University archaeologists start Tregaron elephant dig
>>
>>
>> Not so much pets, but hunting dogs. I have seen a great deal of marked
>> hunting dog burials on various rural hunting tracts in both East Texas
> and
>> Western Colorado.
>>
>> ________________________________
>>
>> From: HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY on behalf of Susan Walter
>> Sent: Mon 4/11/2011 9:01 AM
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> Subject: Re: University archaeologists start Tregaron elephant dig
>>
>>
>>
>> Not elephants, BUT often on rural sites I've stumbled (sometimes
> literally)
>> on what appear to be fieldstone grave markers. In my own yard, our
>> fieldstone markers denote pet burials. Everyone (except Mr. McCoy,
> who was
>> exhumed and moved to a now unidentified final resting place) is
> accounted
>> for from my farmhouse, built in 1890; they are in official cemeteries.
>>
>> Anyone else had pet burials marked like that?
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "geoff carver" <[log in to unmask]>
>> To: <[log in to unmask]>
>> Sent: Sunday, April 10, 2011 12:30 PM
>> Subject: University archaeologists start Tregaron elephant dig
>>
>>
>>> Not quite sure what to think of this; maybe a useful training
> exercise
>>> (PR?), but...
>>> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-13023965
>>> What archaeological information can the grave of a circus elephant
> reveal?
>>> Something about burial customs for circus elephants in 19th c. Wales?
>>
>>
>>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> --------
>>
>>
>>
>> No virus found in this incoming message.
>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>> Version: 9.0.894 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3565 - Release Date:
> 04/10/11
>> 23:35:00
>>
>>
>>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> --------
>>
>>
>>
>> No virus found in this incoming message.
>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>> Version: 9.0.894 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3565 - Release Date:
> 04/10/11
>> 23:35:00
>>
>>
>>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> --------
>>
>>
>>
>> No virus found in this incoming message.
>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>> Version: 9.0.894 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3565 - Release Date:
> 04/10/11
>> 23:35:00
|
