Household specialisation in horse breeding:
the role of returning veterans in the Batavian river area
Maaike Groot
This paper investigates differences in agrarian specialisation between households in two rural settlements in the Roman Dutch River Area, and offers
an explanation for these differences. It also discusses methodological problems that are inherent to
studies at household level, especially when they
involve small samples.
The analysis at household level shows a recurring
pattern: some households specialised in sheep rearing while others specialised in horse breeding. A
suspicion that returned veterans from the Roman
army were responsible for initiating the breeding of
horses as a surplus is confirmed by studies of material culture and house construction.
The far-reaching role of veterans from the Roman
army in social and economic change in the Dutch
River Area is becoming increasingly clear. So far,
this topic has been studied through material culture
and changes in house construction. This paper demonstrates that the analysis of animal bones is another way to study the impact of veterans.
Keywords: specialisation, animal husbandry, surplus
production, Roman, the Netherlands, household, veterans, horse breeding
Introduction and historical
background
The role of individual people in past economies is
fascinating, but difficult to study. The study of
archaeology through animal bones is not the most
obvious route to gain insight into the lives and livelihoods of individual people. In focusing on the size
of samples (large enough to be statistically meaningful), animal remains from archaeological sites
are often grouped together. Chronology is usually
respected, but spatial differentiation within sites
less so. Changes in the agrarian economy are usually studied for an entire settlement. An unfortunate consequence of this focus on entire settlements
and large samples is that we lose sight of individual
people’s contribution to the agrarian economy. Any
differences in animal husbandry between house-
holds also remain invisible. This leads us to the aim
of the research presented in this paper. By analysing animal bone assemblages for households instead
of settlements, I wish to discover whether there
were differences between how households practised animal husbandry. If differences can be determined, it may also be possible to link households,
and thus individual people, to developments in
agriculture.
This paper will address differences in animal husbandry and relative specialisation between households in two rural settlements in the Roman Dutch
River Area, and will offer possible explanations for
these differences. While it offers insights into how
individual people shaped the agrarian economy, it is
also a methodological exploration.
One of the most important facts for the Dutch River
Area in the Roman period is the presence of a
number of army camps along the River Rhine (Fig. 1).
Towns were rare in this area. The large presence of
the Roman army and its demand for food must have
had consequences for the agricultural production in
rural settlements in the area adjacent to the frontier
that supplied animals and/or cereals. It encouraged
local inhabitants to start producing an agrarian surplus. This surplus probably consisted primarily of
animal products. Although the local landscape provided ample grazing for livestock, the area suitable
for arable farming was limited (KOOISTRA 1996;
GROOT ET AL. 2009). The reward of producing a surplus for the Roman market is obvious – it resulted
in the ability to acquire goods. The evidence of
imported goods such as pottery, glass and metal is
widespread in rural settlements in the area. Finds of
coins indicate that local inhabitants participated in
a monetary economy. In the Roman period, the
Dutch River Area was very much a complex society
in which people of very different backgrounds
interacted and traded.
A vital factor in the development of this region was
the system of ethnic recruitment by the Roman
army. Exempt from taxation, the Batavian tribe that
inhabited the Dutch River Area was obliged to supply soldiers for the army (Tacitus, Germania 29;
Historiae 4.12, 5.25). The extent of recruitment was
204
Groot, Household specialisation in horse breeding
Fig. 1 Map of the Netherlands, showing the Dutch River Area, army camps along the River Rhine and the sites mentioned
in the text. Illustration B. Brouwenstijn (ACVU)
such that every community, and perhaps even every
family, had a member who was serving in the army
(WILLEMS 1984, 235). After a period of 25 years,
soldiers were released from the army, and were free
to return to their families and homes. While not
every soldier returned to the civitas Batavorum –
some may have married and preferred to settle down
elsewhere, while others failed to survive army service – enough did so to have a large effect on Batavian communities.
Both the production for a market and the innovative
veterans can be related to the changes that occurred
in animal husbandry in the Early Roman period:
changes in species’ proportions, age distribution
and withers height. Apart from changes in agrarian
practice, differences between settlements are determined. The question is what caused these changes
and created the differences. Were changes in agriculture initiated by local people as a response to
market demand or were they forced on them from
above, either by the Roman army or civilian authorities? Before presenting the results from the zooar-
chaeological analysis at household level, I will provide a summary of the evidence for surplus production of animal products.
Sites and material
In the Dutch River Area, small rural settlements
were the main habitation sites. The settlements
were basically agrarian settlements, with crafts and
industry not exceeding local importance. Habitation consisted mostly of traditional byre houses. In
these houses, people and cattle lived under one roof.
A typical settlement in this region and time period
consisted of a cluster of farmhouses.
This study focuses on two rural settlements in the
civitas of the Batavi, for which I have analysed the
animal bone assemblages: Tiel-Passewaaij and Geldermalsen-Hondsgemet (Fig. 1). Tiel-Passewaaij
actually consists of two separate settlements: Passewaaijse Hogeweg and Oude Tielseweg. Although
the main focus in this paper will be on the animal
Osnabrücker Forschungen zu Altertum und Antike-Rezeption 14
205
Fig. 2 Reconstruction of the settlement Geldermalsen-Hondsgemet phase 3. Illustration Mikko Kriek (ACVU-HBS)
Fig. 3 Reconstruction of the settlement Tiel-Passewaaijse Hogeweg phase 4. Illustration Mikko Kriek (ACVU-HBS)
bone assemblage from Passewaaijse Hogeweg, it will
also include one household from Oude Tielseweg
for the Early Roman period. The sites were excavated by the Archaeological Centre of VU University Amsterdam (HEEREN 2006; HEEREN 2009; VAN
R ENSWOUDE / VAN K ERCKHOVE 2009). Excavations
took place on a large scale: the settlements were
almost completely uncovered. Both are typical settlements for the region, with several byre houses
existing simultaneously (Figs. 2 and 3). They were
inhabited throughout the entire Roman period. This
gives us the opportunity to determine changes in
animal husbandry. Both sites are excellently preserved, and animal bone assemblages of more than
10,000 fragments were collected and analysed
(GROOT 2008; GROOT 2009). The number of fragments
totals nearly 14,000 for Geldermalsen-Hondsgemet
(3,666 assigned to species) and nearly 17,000 for
Tiel-Passewaaijse Hogeweg (6,354 assigned to species). All animal bones from datable features were
included in the analysis.
Methods
The term ‘household’ in this study has two meanings: a spatially defined and archaeologically visible unit consisting of a farmhouse, outbuildings and
enclosure ditches; and a socio-economic agrarian
unit consisting of an (extended) family that lived
and worked together.
Eleven households are included in this study: six for
Geldermalsen-Hondsgemet and five for Tiel-Passewaaij. These are all the households from the Early
to the Late Roman period to which more than a
handful of animal bones could be assigned. The
Late Roman period is not included in the study for
several reasons. These include a possible change in
ethnicity of the people inhabiting the settlements
and uncertainty about the extent of market production in this period. Two households per phase were
examined for three successive phases in Geldermalsen-Hondsgemet. For Tiel-Passewaaij, three
households were studied for the Early Roman period, and two for the period between 130 and 220 AD.
The analysis of animal bone assemblages per household will be limited to the proportions between the
total numbers of fragments for the main domestic
animals. This is purely a pragmatic choice: for eight
out of the 11 households, the samples contain fewer
than 100 fragments that could be assigned to species. This means that it was not possible to study
aspects such as age distribution, butchery marks
and skeletal elements. Comparing the species pro-
206
portions per household with that for the entire phase
to which the household belonged should reveal
whether a household conforms to the general picture for that phase, or whether it deviates from it.
To analyse the proportions of domestic animal species, a simple uncorrected Number of Identified Fragments was used. One reason for this decision is that
I am mainly concerned with changes and differences in proportions, and less with actual numbers
and percentages. Other methods are less suitable.
Proportions in weight, for instance, are revealing
when studying animals as a source of food, but I am
interested in the production of living animals as
well as meat. Since we are dealing with small samples, calculating Minimum Numbers of Individuals
would not be helpful; the numbers would simply be
too small to be meaningful.
Surplus production in the Dutch
River Area
While the concept of surplus production is essential
to this paper, it is not its primary focus. More information and a full discussion on surplus production
in rural settlements can be found elsewhere (GROOT
ET AL. 2009; VOSSEN / GROOT 2009; GROOT 2008A;
GROOT 2008B). Here, I will provide a summary of the
evidence of surplus production in the Dutch River
Area, and discussions related to that evidence.
Since the main evidence for surplus production is
the surplus food itself, it is obvious that this involves
a number of methodological problems. After all, the
surplus products, and thus most of our evidence, are
moved away from production sites. A second complication is that although rural communities may
have produced a surplus, this occurred next to production for their own needs. Thus, our data consists
of evidence of both subsistence production and surplus production. One way to overcome these problems is to combine results from archaeobotanical
and zooarchaeological studies with other types of
evidence (GROOT ET AL. 2009).
I will concentrate on two other types of changes in
animal husbandry: in species composition and mortality profiles. These changes will be interpreted as
a response to the demand from a market, in this
case the Roman army. Changes in species composition reflect changes in the relative importance of animals. Changes in mortality profiles reflect a change
in the exploitation of animals, with an emphasis on
a different product (e.g. meat vs. milk).
Groot, Household specialisation in horse breeding
Geldermalsen-Hondsgemet
In Geldermalsen-Hondsgemet, the main changes in
species composition during the Roman period are
an increase in horses, starting in the Early Roman
period (phase 2, 50 BC - AD 50), and peaking at
31% in phase 4 (AD 150-270). The proportion of
sheep steadily decreases from the Early Roman
period onwards. The proportion of cattle is relatively stable, fluctuating between 51 and 62% during
the Roman period. The exploitation of cattle shows
a development from an emphasis on meat during
the Late Iron Age to an increased emphasis on
manure and labour during the Roman period.
Since habitation in Geldermalsen-Hondsgemet was
continuous between the Late Iron Age and early
Roman period, this settlement allows us to note any
changes that date to the period when the Romans
first arrived in the region: phase 2. Apart from an
increase in sheep, we can also see that the percentage of horse bones already starts to increase in the
Early Roman period.
Tiel-Passewaaij
In Tiel-Passewaaijse Hogeweg, the same broad
trends are found as in Geldermalsen-Hondsgemet:
a decrease in sheep and an increase in horses, taking place mainly during the 2nd century AD (phases 4 and 5-6) but starting in the late 1st century
(phase 3). Sheep seem to have been more important
here than in Geldermalsen-Hondsgemet, and cattle
slightly less important. Although the proportion of
cattle varies only slightly during the Roman period,
the exploitation also shows an increased emphasis
on manure and labour. In the earliest part of the
Roman period, the first half of the 1st century AD
(phase 2), no drastic changes seemed to have
occurred compared to the Late Iron Age. However,
there is a gap of more than one hundred years
between phases 1 and 2.
Surplus production of cattle
Cattle are the most common species in military
sites. Considering their size, they also provided the
majority of meat consumed by soldiers (VAN WIJNGAARDEN-BAKKER 1970, 274; VERHAGEN 1988, 109;
ESSER ET AL. 2004, 6). These cattle were probably
acquired locally. Studying mortality profiles from
complementary sites – production and consumption
sites – can provide insights into how surplus animals were produced. Earlier research demonstrated
Osnabrücker Forschungen zu Altertum und Antike-Rezeption 14
that there were no significant differences in mortality profiles from military sites, towns and rural settlements (GROOT 2008A, 89-90; GROOT 2008B, 73-76).
This suggests that no specialised production of beef
cattle took place. If rural settlements were producing beef cattle specifically for the Roman market,
we would expect them to sell young animals, which
would be the most efficient strategy of production.
Instead, the animals whose remains are found in
military sites reflect the population structure in the
rural settlements. Surplus animals were taken from
existing herds, which were exploited for secondary
products such as traction and manure in the first
place, and meat in the second place.
Surplus production of wool
In the 1st century, the proportion of sheep peaked in
rural settlements in the Dutch River Area. The mortality profiles for phases 2 and 3 in Tiel-Passewaaijse Hogeweg show a change in exploitation of sheep,
from a slaughter peak between six and 12 months to
a slaughter peak of adult animals. This suggests a
shift from milk and meat to wool and meat. The
increase in the proportion of sheep bones and the
change in age distribution suggest that the production of wool gained in importance in the second half
of the 1st century AD. If we assume that enough
wool was already produced to satisfy local demands
in the previous phase, this increased emphasis on
wool suggests that surplus wool was produced specifically for a market. Since the proportions of sheep
declined after around 100 AD, we must assume
that the demand for wool had declined by this time.
In Geldermalsen-Hondsgemet, no such clear evidence for wool production was found. This serves
to highlight the existence of differences between
rural settlements.
Surplus production of horses
At the beginning of the 2nd century, the proportion
of horses increased rapidly in both Tiel-Passewaaijse Hogeweg and Geldermalsen-Hondsgemet. This
is a continuation of a trend that already started in
the second half of the 1st century. High proportions
of horses are found in several other settlements in
the area in the Middle Roman period. It has long
been assumed that these high proportions reflect a
specialisation in horse breeding, connected with the
presence of the army. Horses were not just used by
the cavalry, but also by other army units and for
transporting people and goods. Since there is no
evidence of a central supply of horses, it seems like-
207
ly that many of the horses required were acquired
locally (DAVIES 1969, 434-435; JOHNSTONE 2008).
Differential specialisation between
settlements
The trends in species composition found in TielPassewaaijse Hogeweg and Geldermalsen-Hondsgemet are reflected in many other settlements. In
the Dutch River Area, local communities played an
important role in supplying the Roman army. Rural
settlements were limited in their response to the
demand for products from the Roman army by their
existing livestock, their expertise, the local landscape and local exchange networks.
Relative specialisation in certain products was not
stable, but changed during the Roman period in
many of the settlements from specialised wool production in the 1st century AD to horse breeding in
the 2nd century AD. Although many settlements
show a high proportion of sheep in the 1st century
AD and later a high proportion of horse, the actual
percentages vary. The extent of specialisation clearly differed between settlements.
The two settlements in Tiel-Passewaaij demonstrate
that even adjacent and probably closely related settlements differed in their animal husbandry. Oude
Tielseweg shows a lesser degree of specialisation in
animal husbandry than Passewaaijse Hogeweg:
both the percentages of sheep and horse bones never reach the levels found at Passewaaijse Hogeweg.
How livestock was managed seems to have differed
as well. While young lambs were absent in Passewaaijse Hogeweg, suggesting that sheep were kept
outside the settlement all year round, bones of juvenile sheep were found in Oude Tielseweg (GROOT /
KOOISTRA 2009). The relation between the two settlements is difficult to grasp. Could it be that Oude
Tielseweg was subservient to its larger neighbour?
Another settlement that illustrates differential development and specialisation is Wijk bij Duurstede-De
Horden. Here, the increase in the percentage of horse
bones seen elsewhere occurs much earlier (LAARMAN 1996, 379, Table 61). While the breeding of
horses already gained importance during the Early
Roman period, sheep and wool production never
played a significant role in this settlement. The closer proximity of Wijk bij Duurstede to the Roman
limes could have resulted in earlier, more intensive
contacts between the army and local inhabitants.
The army formed a ready market for any surplus
Groot, Household specialisation in horse breeding
208
Fig. 4 Map of Geldermalsen-Hondsgemet during phase 2.
Illustration J. van Renswoude (ACVU-HBS)
horses that could be produced, and the inhabitants
of this settlement may simply have been quicker to
respond to this demand.
At the moment, it is very difficult to establish whether differences in animal husbandry between settlements are a deliberate choice, or whether they are due
to the limited possibilities of the existing livestock
and expertise. It could, of course, also be that authorities dictated what rural communities had to produce
(ROYMANS 1996, 86). Now that we have established
that differential specialisation between rural communities existed, it is time to proceed to differences
in animal husbandry between households.
Differential specialisation between
households
Geldermalsen-Hondsgemet
For the early Roman period (phase 2), there are only
minor differences between the two analysed households (Figs. 4 and 5). The only real difference is that
Fig. 5 Species composition for phase 2,
house 16 and house 19, in Geldermalsen-Hondsgemet.
Illustration B. Brouwenstijn (ACVU)
Osnabrücker Forschungen zu Altertum und Antike-Rezeption 14
209
Fig. 6 Map of Geldermalsen-Hondsgemet during phase 3.
Illustration J. van Renswoude (ACVU-HBS)
house 16 has a higher percentage of horse fragments than house 19. However, the difference in the
actual number of fragments is very small. This is
precisely what we would expect to find. In this early phase, the effect of the presence of the Roman
army is negligible, and any differences in animal
husbandry between households are small.
For phase 3, the second half of the 1st century and
the fi rst half of the 2nd century, the differences
between two households are more noticeable
(Figs. 6 and 7). House 2 has a very high percentage of sheep bones (58%), whereas house 20 shows
high percentages of horses (26%) and cattle, but
a low percentage of sheep (14%). The dates of
these two houses overlap, but the period when
house 2 was in use starts and ends about 20 years
earlier than house 20. This could partially explain
the differences: since sheep decline in this phase
and horses increase, it is not surprising that the
earlier house shows a higher percentage of sheep
and a lower percentage of horses compared to the
later house. However, the differences seem too
large for them to be merely a result of slightly differing dates.
Fig. 7 Species composition for phase 3,
house 2 and house 20, in Geldermalsen-Hondsgemet.
Illustration B. Brouwenstijn (ACVU)
Groot, Household specialisation in horse breeding
210
Fig. 8 Map of Geldermalsen-Hondsgemet during phase 4.
Illustration J. van Renswoude (ACVU-HBS)
The two households of phase 4 show the same differences that were found for phase 3: house 10 has a
high percentage of sheep bones (44%) and a low
percentage of horse bones (8%), whereas house 5
has a high percentage of horse bones (34%) and a
low percentage of sheep (7%) (Figs. 8 and 9).
Tiel-Passewaaijse Hogeweg
For phase 2, the Early Roman period, three households could be analysed: house 2 in Oude Tielseweg
and houses 23 and X in Passewaaijse Hogeweg.1
Although the exact dates of these houses differ, they
can all be dated between 20 BC and AD 20. Phase 2
has a broader date of 50 BC to AD 70. Two households
show a similar species composition to each other and
to the phase as a whole (Figs. 10 and 11). House 23
differs by a higher percentage of cattle compared to
sheep, and a slightly higher percentage of horses.
1
House X was not numbered because no actual house plan
was found. It is uncertain whether this farmyard ever had a
farmhouse.
Fig. 9 Species composition for phase 4,
house 5 and house 10, in Geldermalsen-Hondsgemet.
Illustration B. Brouwenstijn (ACVU)
Osnabrücker Forschungen zu Altertum und Antike-Rezeption 14
Fig. 10 Map of Tiel-Passewaaij during phase 2. Illustration Stijn Heeren.
211
Groot, Household specialisation in horse breeding
212
Fig. 11 Species composition for phase 2, houses 2, 23 and X, in Tiel-Passewaaij.
Illustration B. Brouwenstijn (ACVU)
Unfortunately, it was not possible to analyse households for phase 3 in Tiel-Passewaaij. The numbers
of animal bones assigned to houses were too small
to draw any conclusions.
For phase 4, two contemporary households in Passewaaijse Hogeweg yielded sufficient material: house
3 and house 25. This means we can study the largest
and the smallest house for this phase. House 3
shows a species composition similar to that of the
entire phase: a high percentage of horses (22%), and
a relatively low percentage of sheep (26%), at least
compared to earlier phases (Figs. 12 and 13). House
25 has a low percentage of horses (8%), and a high
percentage of sheep (48 %).
Discussion: possible explanations for
differences between households
So far, I have treated the differences in species composition between households as if they reflect actual
differences in the number of animals owned by a
household, and thus in animal husbandry. Unfortunately, things are not that simple. Several factors
influence the analysis of animal bones at household
level. These factors, and their possible effect on my
results, will be discussed in this section.
Bias of small samples
As mentioned earlier, the numbers of animal bones
per household are very small. This means that the
differences could be accidental. Furthermore, the
size of the samples per household varies strongly
in some cases. However, the data do show a recurring pattern, and no unexpected results, such as for
instance, a high percentage of pig, or an absence of
cattle. Furthermore, the species composition of
some of the households fit that of the phase they
belong to.
Differences in dating
Slight differences in dating could have an effect on
our data. Farmhouses and farmyards are rarely dated to the exact same time period. Although the
houses compared above are all dated to the same
phase, their exact dates differ slightly. In some cases,
differences in species proportions could be related
to such small differences. For instance, in phase 3
in Geldermalsen-Hondsgemet, the house with the
higher percentage of horse bones is dated about
20 years later than the other house. Since this is the
phase in which the proportion of horses increases, a
slightly later date could explain the difference
between the two households. A further complication is that the time span to which houses are dated
normally extends beyond a human lifespan. It is
Osnabrücker Forschungen zu Altertum und Antike-Rezeption 14
213
Fig. 12 Map of Tiel-Passewaaij during phase 4. Illustration Stijn Heeren.
generally assumed that houses in this region survived for roughly one generation, or ca. 20 years,
before requiring repairs or rebuilding (GERRITSEN
2003, 39). This means that the actual time period a
house was in use falls somewhere within the date
given. It is not possible to further divide and date
material from within the lifespan of a house. Shortterm changes that take place within one generation
are therefore not visible.
Random selection of households
The choice of households for this analysis is not
based on sound arguments, but is determined by
the availability and numbers of animal bones. Ideally, all households should be analysed separately,
but some yielded few or no material at all. For
instance, for phase 2 in Tiel-Passewaaij, the largest
farmhouses could not be included in this study. In
one case, I compared two households from separate but adjacent settlements (phase 2 in TielPassewaaij). I consider this to be legitimate since
the proportions for phase 2 for the two settlements
are very similar.
Fig. 13 Species composition for phase 4,
house 3 and house 25, in Tiel-Passewaaijse Hogeweg.
Illustration B. Brouwenstijn (ACVU)
214
Reworking of earlier deposits
Some of the later houses were built in areas that had
been occupied intensively in previous phases. Digging ditches and pits may have unearthed earlier
animal bones, which would then be mixed with the
later material. This could explain a high percentage
of sheep, characteristic of the Early Roman period.
However, since the percentages of sheep for house 2
in phase 3 and house 10 in phase 4 in GeldermalsenHondsgemet are much higher than in any of the earlier phases, I do not believe this explains the differences. Furthermore, house 2 in phase 3 is located in
an area of the settlement that was not used before.
Although the effect of the reworking of earlier material cannot be excluded, it is not a satisfying explanation for the differences between households.
Feature type and taphonomy
The feature type in which animal bones are found
can affect the proportions between species (DERREUMAUX ET AL. 2008, 65; M ALTBY 1985, 41-42).
Generally, pits are filled more quickly than ditches,
providing better preservation conditions for smaller
and more fragile fragments. The effect of feature
type on species composition was studied for Geldermalsen-Hondsgemet. In phase 2, most of the
animal bones from house 19 were found in ditches,
whereas most of the material from house 16 was
found in pits. Nevertheless, the species composition
for the two households is very similar. The effect of
feature type is hard to assess for phases 3 and 4. For
houses 10 and 20, for example, 70–90% of the animal bones derive from ‘wet’ contexts, which could
explain a high percentage of sheep. But although a
high percentage of sheep is found for house 10, this
is not the case for house 20.
The number of features contributing animal bones
could also have an effect. An assemblage originating from a larger number of features is probably
more representative than that from only a handful
of features. The material for house 2 in GeldermalsenHondsgemet, for example, derives from only two
features. The probability that this material represents just one single moment in animal husbandry
or household activities is high.
Interpretation of animal bone finds
A further kind of problem is that archaeologists
have difficulty understanding what animal bones
actually mean. They do not reflect the proportion of
Groot, Household specialisation in horse breeding
living animals, but rather the proportion of animals
killed and processed in a certain location. For
example, sheep may always have been butchered in
a certain zone within the settlement or by a certain
person. Even then, butchery and the disposal of
waste are two entirely different processes. The concept of waste is problematic, as this is a cultural
construct. How waste was disposed of and how it
could spread through a settlement is little understood. For the purpose of this study, I have assumed
that the distance between the source and the final
deposition is not significant, i.e. that animal bones
found near a farmhouse derive from animals killed
and butchered at or near this location.
Animal bones could also reflect consumption patterns, with one household consuming more sheep,
and another more horse meat. Since the consumption of horse meat seems to be associated with ritual activities, this could mean more than just a difference in taste (COOL 2006, 92). A more detailed study
of skeletal elements and butchery marks, and any
differences in these between households, could tell
us more. However, the numbers of fragments from
Geldermalsen-Hondsgemet and Tiel-Passewaaij are
simply too small for such an investigation. One
argument against interpreting animal bones as solely consumption waste is the presence of dog bones,
which are found in most farmyards.
Militaria and the veteran model
Since the past is usually more complicated than we
think, there may well be various reasons behind the
differences in species composition. At the moment,
there seem to be more complications and problems
than results. However, there are several reasons for
concluding that the differences observed between
households do indeed reflect differences in animal
husbandry strategies.
First, the differences are not random, but fit in with
our knowledge of animal husbandry in the region.
For example, a high percentage of pig bones is never found, and cattle fragments are always present.
Second, the data show a recurring pattern, both
between phases and between settlements. A distinction can be made between households with high
percentages of sheep and households with high percentages of horses. Some factors, such as the reworking of earlier material, and the effect of feature
type, can be excluded, at least for some phases. The
effect of these factors can be accurately assessed by
high-quality fieldwork and by using the expertise of
the site archaeologist.
Osnabrücker Forschungen zu Altertum und Antike-Rezeption 14
215
features in a farmyard. In Tiel-Passewaaijse Hogeweg,
for instance, house 3 is surrounded by several ditches, which are missing in house 20. It would be better
if we could use the ratio of metal finds with a military
character to that of other metal finds. At the moment,
such data is not available. Phase 2 in Tiel-Passewaaij
is a reminder that the interpretation of metal finds,
and their relation to animal bone assemblages, is not
straightforward. House X, which was unremarkable
as far as species composition was concerned, yielded
a high number of metal finds with a military character, whereas house 23, the house with a higher percentage of horse fragments, had the lowest number of
military finds.
Fig. 14 Metal finds with a military character from
house 20 in Geldermalsen-Hondsgemet (phase 3).
Illustration Mikko Kriek (ACVU-HBS)
There is one further reason for taking the differences
between households seriously. When other archaeological data are taken into account, an interesting
pattern is revealed. House 20 in phase 3 in Geldermalsen-Hondsgemet is not only the most prominent
house in this phase – both in size and considering the
enclosure ditches – the large number of metal finds
with a military character also suggest that the owner
of this house had served in the Roman army (Fig. 14).
The contemporary house 2 only yielded one military
piece. The family in house 2 seems to have continued the local animal husbandry tradition, with a
strong focus on sheep, while the owner of house 20
introduced a new development: a specialisation in
the breeding of horses. House 5 of phase 4 in Geldermalsen-Hondsgemet was not a large house, but it did
have its own enclosure. A piece of a scabbard was
found in this farmyard. In the adjacent enclosure, a
concentration of metal horse gear was found. Again,
this phase seems to show the existence of a household that clung to a traditional way of agrarian practice, and one that concentrated on the breeding of
horses. House 3 of phase 4 in Tiel-Passewaaijse
Hogeweg is also remarkable for its large size, adjacent enclosed area and larger number of military
metal finds and horse gear. The enclosure may have
been used for training horses.
Of course, absolute numbers of metal finds may
reflect the density of finds rather than anything else.
Finds density is connected to the number and type of
Nevertheless, it is hard to believe that the recurrent
association between a high percentage of horse
bones and a relatively high number of military metal finds and horse gear could be a coincidence. The
presence of military finds in rural settlements can
be explained by the fact that many Batavian men
served in the Roman army and returned to their
home villages after they had been discharged,
bringing some of their equipment with them (NICOLAY 2007). It looks as if they were the ones who
initiated a new development in animal husbandry:
breeding horses as a surplus (Fig. 15).
For Tiel-Passewaaijse Hogeweg, the construction of
farmhouses and outbuildings provides further relevant information. A development in outbuildings
which has been linked to horse breeding is the
appearance of separate stables from the later 1st
century onwards (GROOT 2008, 83-84; HEEREN 2009,
172-173; GROOT ET AL. 2009, 250). Since these stables are found next to farmhouses with traditional
byre sections, and coincide with the increase in the
proportion of horses, it seems logical to conclude
that the stables housed horses. In fact, house 3, a
house where a high percentage of horse bones was
found, has one of these stables in its farmyard. It
has been identified independently in another study
as a house inhabited by a veteran (HEEREN 2009,
159), on the basis of certain elements in the construction and material culture such as militaria,
seal-boxes and keys. What is interesting is that at
this site, the farmyards with stables are also the
ones with large granaries, which have been associated with the production of a surplus of cereals
(GROOT ET AL. 2009, 248-249). Even more interestingly, the farmhouses with stables and/or large granaries are of a type now referred to as the ‘veteran
farmhouse’. This type of farmhouse has a surrounding portico inspired by military barracks (VOS
2009, 243-247; HEEREN 2009, 157-160). When this
information is combined with the distribution of
Groot, Household specialisation in horse breeding
216
Fig. 15 A Batavian veteran from the Roman army has a brilliant idea.
Illustration Mikko Kriek (ACVU-HBS)
‘military’ metal finds, there is only one conclusion:
these farmhouses were inhabited by veterans (and
their families), and it was they who were responsible for the surplus of horses and cereals.
This conclusion fits into recent research into the
role of veterans from the Roman army in developments in rural settlements. Veterans are now
thought to be responsible for the introduction and
spread of literacy in the Dutch River Area (DERKS /
ROYMANS 2002, 100-102). As we have seen, they
also introduced new developments in house construction in rural settlements, using their knowledge of Roman military building styles (VOS 2009,
243-247; HEEREN 2009, 157-160). Veterans clearly
played an important role in social and economic
developments. The move to breeding and selling
horses is one further achievement that can be attributed to veterans. It is not surprising to discover a
link between veterans and horse breeding (with the
army as the main market). After all, they are the
ones who had contacts in the army, and knew what
the army required. They may also have had the
financial means to instigate change.
Further research
This study started out as a first attempt to discover
differential specialisation in animal husbandry in
rural settlements in the Dutch River Area. The relation discovered between surplus production and
veterans was an unexpected result.
Analysis at household level is most promising in
large, well-excavated and well-analysed settlements.
Moreover, good contacts between the site archaeologist and the animal bone specialist, and the exchange
of information and ideas, is essential. Obviously,
such research can only be carried out after the animal bone assemblage from the entire site has been
analysed, allowing the results for households to be
compared to the overall results for the relevant
phase. Thorough zooarchaeological studies of large
samples remain of the utmost importance. A rather
humbling conclusion from this study is that even for
large-scale excavations with large animal bone
assemblages, the samples per households are still
too small to allow anything more than a comparison
of the proportions between species.
Excavations of the calibre of Geldermalsen-Hondsgemet and Tiel-Passewaaij are rare, but even smaller
Osnabrücker Forschungen zu Altertum und Antike-Rezeption 14
sites and excavations of sections of large sites can be
suitable for household analysis. The important factor is to collect and analyse finds in such a way that
the results can easily be related to individual households. However, it is essential that research at household level becomes part of our research agenda.
This study has touched on a number of aspects that
require further research. First, the association between
a high percentage of horse bones and other indicators such as military metal finds, seal-boxes, “veteran houses”, etc. needs to be explored further by
systematic studies. Second, taphonomy, including
the reworking of earlier material and the effect of
feature type, should always be taken into account.
This is really a research area in its own right, where
a lot of work remains to be done. Next, we need a
better understanding of the disposal of waste in
rural settlements in this region. Studies focusing on
(variations in) weathering, fragmentation and refitting of both material and organic finds could shed
some light on disposal practices. We also need to
consider what the results mean for social and economic organisation in the area. If indeed veterans
introduced the concept of the surplus production of
horses for a market to the Dutch River Area, what
happened next? Did they control horse breeding, or
was this pursuit open to their neighbours as well?
This study has demonstrated that not every household was involved in horse breeding, so it is conceivable that veterans not only initiated horse
breeding, but that this specialisation continued to
be dominated by military families. Cereal production was another important part of the agricultural
economy. The location of large granaries near veteran farmhouses suggests that this, too, was a business undertaken by veterans and their families. But
were they the only ones producing a surplus, or did
they collect the surplus produced by their neighbours? Finally, what is the meaning of veterans and
veteran farmhouses if it is true that every family in
the civitas Batavorum had its own veteran? Although
an analysis at household level must overcome many
problems and take into account several factors, and
would benefit from more research in other areas, it
offers enormous potential. It moves away from
looking at animal husbandry as something practised by an entire community to seeing it as a livelihood pursued by a single family. It also offers a
tempting glance at the choices people made and the
developments they instigated.
217
Conclusion
While certain trends in animal husbandry are found
in rural settlements in the Dutch River Area, there
is variation, both at settlement and household level.
Whether or not this variation is a result of choice is
impossible to tell at present. Variation between settlements is found in the extent of relative specialisation, and the moment when specialisation occurred.
Variation at household level is found in the animal
species specialisation was focused on: either sheep
or horse. The households with a high percentage of
sheep reflect a local animal husbandry tradition,
whereas the households with a high percentage of
horses reflect a new development.
The households with a high percentage of horse
fragments have also yielded a high number of military metal finds and horse gear. This suggests a link
between horse breeding and returned veterans.
Horse breeding may have been initiated and controlled by veterans. It is not surprising that the breeding
of horses, destined for the Roman army, was controlled by people with connections in the army.
The suspicion that veterans played a role in horse
breeding in the Dutch River Area is not a new one, but
this is the first time that we can support it with archaeological evidence. This demonstrates once again that
the study of animal bones can do much more than
merely provide information on animal husbandry; it
can give an insight into social change as well.
References
COOL 2006
H.E.M. COOL, Eating and drinking in Roman Britain. Cambridge 2006.
DAVIES 1969
R.W. DAVIES, The supply of animals to the Roman army and
the remount system. Latomus 28, 1969, 429-459.
DERKS / ROYMANS 2002
T. DERKS / N. ROYMANS, Seal-boxes and the spread of Latin
literacy in the Rhine delta, in: A.E. COOLEY (Ed.), Becoming
Roman, writing Latin? Literacy and epigraphy in the Roman
West, Journal of Roman Archaeology, Supplementary
Series 48. Portsmouth, Rhode Island 2002, 87-134.
DERREUMAUX / LEPETZ / JACQUES / PRILAUX 2008
M. DERREUMAUX / S. LEPETZ / A. JACQUES / G. PRILAUX, Food
supply at two successive military settlements in Arras
(France): an archaeobotanical and archaeozoological
approach, in: S. Stallibrass / R. Thomas (Eds.), Feeding the
Roman army. The archaeology of production and supply in
NW Europe, Oxford 2008, 52-68.
ESSER ET AL. 2004
E. Esser / B. Beerenhout / W.J. Kuijper, De wacht aan tafel.
Onderzoek aan dierlijke resten uit Romeinse wachttorens
(locatie Zandweg L31). Ossicle 85. Delft 2004.
Groot, Household specialisation in horse breeding
218
GERRITSEN 2003
F. GERRITSEN, Local identities. Landscape and community in
the late prehistoric Meuse-Demer-Scheldt region. Amsterdam Archaeological Studies 9, Amsterdam 2003.
GROOT 2008A
M. GROOT, Surplus production of animal products for the
Roman army in a rural settlement in the Dutch River Area,
in: S. STALLIBRASS / R. THOMAS (Eds.), Feeding the Roman
army. The archaeology of production and supply in NW
Europe, Oxford 2008, 83-98.
GROOT 2008B
M. GROOT, Animals in ritual and economy in a frontier community. Excavations in Tiel-Passewaaij. Amsterdam
Archaeological Studies 12, Amsterdam 2008.
GROOT ET AL. 2009
M. GROOT / S. HEEREN / L.I. KOOISTRA / W.K. VOS, Surplus
production for the market? The agrarian economy in the
non-villa landscapes of Germania Inferior. Journal of
Roman Archaeology 22, 2009, 231-252.
GROOT / KOOISTRA 2009
M. GROOT / L.I. KOOISTRA, Land use and the agrarian economy in the Roman Dutch River Area. Internet Archaeology
27, 2009. http://intarch.ac.uk/journal/issue27/5/1.html
GROOT 2009
M. GROOT, Dierlijk botmateriaal, in: J. VAN R ENSWOUDE / J.
VAN K ERCKHOVE (Eds.), Opgravingen in Geldermalsen-Hondsgemet. Een inheemse nederzetting uit de Late IJzertijd en
Romeinse tijd, Zuidnederlandse Archeologische Rapporten
35. Amsterdam 2009, 355-409.
HEEREN 2006
S. HEEREN, Opgravingen bij Tiel-Passewaaij 1. De nederzetting aan de Passewaaijse Hogeweg. Zuidnederlandse
Archeologische Rapporten 29. Amsterdam 2006.
HEEREN 2009
S. HEEREN, Romanisering van rurale gemeenschappen in de
civitas Batavorum De casus Tiel-Passewaaij. Nederlandse
Archeologische Rapporten 36, Amersfoort 2009.
JOHNSTONE 2008
C. JOHNSTONE, Commodities or Logistics? The role of equids
in Roman supply networks, in: S. STALLIBRASS / R. THOMAS
(Eds.), Feeding the Roman army. The archaeology of production and supply in NW Europe, Oxford 2008, 128-145.
KOOISTRA 1996
L.I. KOOISTRA, Borderland farming. Amersfoort 1996.
LAARMAN 1996
F.J. LAARMAN, Zoological material of the Bronze Age, Iron
Age and Roman period from Wijk bij Duurstede-De Horden, in: L. I. KOOISTRA, Borderland farming, Amersfoort
1996, 369-380.
MALTBY 1985
M. M ALTBY, Patterns in faunal assemblage variability, in: G.
BARKER / C. GAMBLE (Eds.), Beyond domestication in prehistoric Europe. Investigations in subsistence archaeology and
social complexity, London 1985, 33-74.
NICOLAY 2007
J. NICOLAY, Armed Batavians. Use and significance of weaponry and horse gear from non-military contexts in the Rhine
delta (50 BC to AD 450). Amsterdam Archaeological Studies 11, Amsterdam 2007.
VAN R ENSWOUDE / VAN K ERCKHOVE 2009
J. VAN R ENSWOUDE / J. VAN K ERCKHOVE, Opgravingen in Geldermalsen-Hondsgemet. Een inheemse nederzetting uit de
Late IJzertijd en Romeinse tijd. Zuidnederlandse Archeologische Rapporten 35, Amsterdam 2009.
ROYMANS 1996
N. ROYMANS, The sword or the plough. Regional dynamics
in the romanisation of Belgic Gaul and the Rhineland
area, in: N. ROYMANS (Ed.), From the sword to the plough.
Three studies on the earliest romanisation of Northern
Gaul, Amsterdam Archaeological Studies 1, Amsterdam
1996, 9-127.
VERHAGEN 1988
M. VERHAGEN, Eten en gegeten worden: enige opmerkingen
over het consumptiegedrag in het castellum te Valkenburg
(Z.H.), in: J.H.F. BLOEMERS (Ed.), Archaeologie en oecologie
van Holland tussen Rijn en Vlie, Assen 1988, 108-120.
VOS 2009
W. VOS, Bataafs platteland. Het Romeinse nederzettingslandschap in het Nederlandse Kromme-Rijngebied. Nederlandse Archeologische Rapporten. Amersfoort 2009.
VOSSEN / GROOT 2009
I. Vossen / M. Groot, Barley and Horses: Surplus and
Demand in the civitas Batavorum, in: M. DRIESSEN / S. HEEREN / J. H ENDRIKS / F. K EMMERS / R. VISSER (Eds.), TRAC
2008. Proceedings of the Eighteenth Annual Theoretical
Roman Archaeology Conference Amsterdam 2008, Oxford
2009, 85-100.
WIJNGAARDEN-BAKKER 1970
L.H. WIJNGAARDEN-BAKKER, Dierenresten uit het castellum
te Zwammerdam. Voorbericht over de opgravingscampagnes 1968 en 1969, Helinium X, 3, 1970, 274-278.
WILLEMS 1984
W.J.H. WILLEMS, Romans and Batavians. A regional study in
the Dutch Eastern River Area, II, Berichten van de ROB 34,
1984, 39-332.