mans best friend

[kreative]

Posted by [Mainejman]:

During the Moorehead phase. Around 4,000 years ago in Maine.Apparently dogs in some instances were highly reguarded.Several red ocher dog burial sites would suggest they were used for more than emergency food sources.When were dogs recorded in your area?The dog bones were found in a midden at the Turner farm site.One was buried next to a ritualistic cache of artifacts....

[rmartin]

This is something of great interest to me so thanks for starting the thread. One of the oldest dog burials in the US was found at the Koster Site here in Illinois and charcoal from that level carbon dated it about 8500 years old. Another documented one I know of was at the Kincaid site and dated about 250 B.C. Several years ago I witnessed one excavated near me that was estimated to be Early to Middle woodland although I have never seen a report on it. That could be anywhere from 2000 to 4000 years old.

http://www.museum.state.il.us/muslink/nat_amer/pre/htmls/a_animals.html

http://www.kincaidmounds.com/Library/Baumer%20Dog%20at%20Kincaid%20KMSO.pdf

[CMD]

Here's a little info from our region, Jay. I hunted this site after the dig and found a broken soapstone dish. A friend found a nice hard stone adze.

http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/40914311?uid=3739888&uid=2460338175&uid=2460337935&uid=2&uid=4&uid=83&uid=63&uid=3739256&sid=21103301141117

[kreative]

Posted by [Mainejman]:

Well in a time when some people were eating each other.Just not ending up on a stick over a fire shows they must have been fairly fond of them.  :sick:

[rmartin]

mainejman wrote:

Well in a time when some people were eating each other.Just not ending up on a stick over a fire shows they must have been fairly fond of them.  :sick:

Good point, they had to be valued members of the community due to the care in which they were laid to rest.

[gregszybala]

Thanks gents, some cool info.
Imagine having dogs around back then would be real handy. Guard, alarm, carry items, hind quarter in an emergency.

[painshill]

Quite by chance, I was in the process of compiling an entry for the Information Center on this very topic. What prompted me was the recent report from the University of Chicago in PLOS Genetics which suggests that the ancestry of dogs is rather more complex than previously imagined. The genetic evidence suggests that dogs and wolves evolved separately from a common ancestor between 11,000 and 34,000 years ago. Modern breeds of dog (regardless of geographic origin) are much more closely related to each other than to wolves and the genetic overlap observed between some modern dogs and wolves is largely the result of interbreeding after dog domestication – rather than indicative of a direct line of descent from wolves. The popular story of early farmers taming and adopting a few docile, friendly wolves that later became our modern canine companions appears to be incorrect.  Instead, the earliest dogs may have already split from the wolf branch of the tree and lived among hunter-gatherer societies before ultimately adapting to agricultural life and bonding with humans.
I’ll put a link here in the next day or so to what I had already assembled, supplemented by anything you guys post here which adds to the picture.

[Ron Kelley]

painshill wrote:

Quite by chance, I was in the process of compiling an entry for the Information Center on this very topic. What prompted me was the recent report from the University of Chicago in PLOS Genetics which suggests that the ancestry of dogs is rather more complex than previously imagined. The genetic evidence suggests that dogs and wolves evolved separately from a common ancestor between 11,000 and 34,000 years ago. Modern breeds of dog (regardless of geographic origin) are much more closely related to each other than to wolves and the genetic overlap observed between some modern dogs and wolves is largely the result of interbreeding after dog domestication – rather than indicative of a direct line of descent from wolves. The popular story of early farmers taming and adopting a few docile, friendly wolves that later became our modern canine companions appears to be incorrect.  Instead, the earliest dogs may have already split from the wolf branch of the tree and lived among hunter-gatherer societies before ultimately adapting to agricultural life and bonding with humans.
I’ll put a link here in the next day or so to what I had already assembled, supplemented by anything you guys post here which adds to the picture.

  Roger this has me wondering: Did this split between wolf and dog take place Simultaneously on several different continents? Or didn't the theory go that far yet?

[kreative]

Posted by [Mainejman]:

Pretty interesting cmd .The fact that they burried a puppy with one of their infants is another testimony to the high reguard at least this particular animal was held.Not unlike today where peoples canines are treated as family.

[kreative]

Posted by [Mainejman]:

Martin wow twice as old as the burials here.If these dogs could be used to drive game or even used to find wounded prey they would be valuable.It doesnt seem that they are found in large numbers.This maybe due to availability.Or maybe only certain individuals were allowed to possess them.

[OnewiththewilD]

B) this is a great topic.im sure the list of things a dog was useful for back then could fill a book.plus think of the idea that the dog was probably the only animal that seemed to understand and listen to them.thats very deep to a people who's connection with the animal world is already so close.

[painshill]

[QUOTE]Ron Kelley wrote:

Quite by chance, I was in the process of compiling an entry for the Information Center on this very topic. What prompted me was the recent report from the University of Chicago in PLOS Genetics which suggests that the ancestry of dogs is rather more complex than previously imagined. The genetic evidence suggests that dogs and wolves evolved separately from a common ancestor between 11,000 and 34,000 years ago. Modern breeds of dog (regardless of geographic origin) are much more closely related to each other than to wolves and the genetic overlap observed between some modern dogs and wolves is largely the result of interbreeding after dog domestication – rather than indicative of a direct line of descent from wolves. The popular story of early farmers taming and adopting a few docile, friendly wolves that later became our modern canine companions appears to be incorrect.  Instead, the earliest dogs may have already split from the wolf branch of the tree and lived among hunter-gatherer societies before ultimately adapting to agricultural life and bonding with humans.
I’ll put a link here in the next day or so to what I had already assembled, supplemented by anything you guys post here which adds to the picture.

  Roger this has me wondering: Did this split between wolf and dog take place Simultaneously on several different continents? Or didn't the theory go that far yet?
You have to read the evidence from the paper in context with the work of other researchers. It doesn’t so much eradicate previous views as fill in the gaps and refute some of the previous “guesswork” that filled those gaps. Work by Thalmann, Krause et al. in 2013 has revised the view that the ancestor of dogs came from East Asia. Their view from the DNA studies is that all dogs living today – everywhere in the world - can be traced back to four genetic lineages, all of which originated in Europe.
The earliest archaeological evidence for dog-like canids in North America dates to about 9,400 years ago and those animals likely crossed the Bering land bridge in the company of humans during a migration from Siberia. It’s regarded as quite likely that at least some of those migrant people were using sled-dogs.

[Olden]

OnewiththewilD wrote:

B) this is a great topic.im sure the list of things a dog was useful for back then could fill a book.plus think of the idea that the dog was probably the only animal that seemed to understand and listen to them.thats very deep to a people who's connection with the animal world is already so close.

  Yep, great topic!
It didn't take long for the NA's to see that the canine could alert them to trouble
(enemies, bears, lions), track, carry their possessions, and maybe even fight for them.

[painshill]

What I had been working on is now here:

http://arrowheads.com/forums/cultural-beliefs-a-mythology/79401-native-american-attitudes-to-the-dog#111387

You can't add to it directly because it's in the Information Center (ie it's "locked) but I will continue to add any interesting information generated here.

[Olden]

.
PBS has been making some excellent films about the dog - here's a few:
Dogs That Changed the World
Full Episode: The Rise of the Dog

http://www.pbs.org/wnet/nature/episodes/dogs-that-changed-the-world/full-episode-the-rise-of-the-dog/8369/

Dogs That Changed the World
Full Episode: Dogs By Design

http://www.pbs.org/wnet/nature/episodes/dogs-that-changed-the-world/full-episode-dogs-by-design/8372/

Dogs That Changed the World
Video: Speedy Saluki

http://www.pbs.org/wnet/nature/episodes/dogs-that-changed-the-world/video-speedy-saluki/1326/

Cold Warriors: Wolves and Buffalo
Full Episode

http://www.pbs.org/wnet/nature/episodes/cold-warriors-wolves-and-buffalo/full-episode/8187/