G 3172
method for researching archaeological materials.
M.P. Gryaznov was a pioneer in involving new
methods to study artifacts, from statistical and
multidisciplinary to trasological (science of
traces, from Franch la trace and Greek lógοB )
M.P. Gryaznov was an excellent teacher.
From 1946, he was giving lectures on Siberian
archaeology and trasology in the history faculty
at Leningrad University, producing highly
qualified archaeologists. The broadness of his
scientific mind and his gift for educating united
many students and followers from different
scientific schools.
Gryaznov always combined his research work
with teaching, lecturing, and administration. From
1949, he was the head of office work laboratory,
and from 1957, he was in charge of the laboratory
of archaeological technology at the Institute of
Archaeology at USSR’s Academy of Sciences.
He was the head of the Middle Asia and Caucasus
Sector at Leningrad Department of Institute of
Archaeology (at present time Institute of Material
Culture in Saint-Petersburg) for 15 years from
1953 to 1968. For the last 10 of these years, he
led the Leningrad Section of field research at the
Presidium of USSR’s Academy of Sciences.
In the archaeological chronicles of Eurasia,
M.P. Gryaznov is recognized as an outstanding
archaeologist, one of the main specialists of
ancient Siberian history and Eurasian steppe
cultures.
Cross-References
▶ Archaeology of Art: Theoretical Frameworks
▶ Art Studies: Normative Approaches
▶ Askarov, Akhmadali A.
▶ Burial Archaeology and the Soviet Era
▶ Excavation Methods in Archaeology
References
GRYAZNOV, M.P. 1969. Southern Sibiria. Geneva:
Archaeologia Mundi.
- 1980. Arzhan – Tsarskiy kurgan ranneskifskogo vremeni
[Arzhan – Royal Mound of Early Scythian Period].
Leningrad: Nauka.
Guinea Pig: Domestication
Further Reading
GRYAZNOV, M.P. 1928. Fürstengräber im Altaigebiet.
Wiener Prähistorische Zeitschrift XV.
- 1929. Ein bronzener Dolch mit Widderkopf aus
Ostsibirien. Artibus Asiae 4.
- 1930. Drevnie kultury Altaya. Materialy po izucheniyu
Sibiri. Novosibirsk 2.
- 1933. The Pazirik burial of Altai. American Journal of
Archaeology XXXVII.
- 1958. Drevnee iskusstvo Altaya. Leningrad.
- 1970. Pastusheskie plemena Sredney Azii v epokhu
razvitoy i pozdney Bronzy. KSIA 122.
Guinea Pig: Domestication
Silvana Rosenfeld
Department of Anthropology, University of
South Dakota, Vermillion, SD, USA
Basic Species Information
Guinea pigs (Cavia porcellus, Linneaus 1758;
Rodentia, Caviidae) were the only small mam-
mals domesticated in the Americas. The other
New Word animal domesticates were turkeys
(Maleagris gallopavo), llamas (Lama glama),
alpacas (Lama pacos), and muscovy ducks
(Cairina moschata).
Guinea pigs are small Andean rodents that still
function as a delicacy food (Fig. 1), as an instru-
ment to diagnose disease, and as key component
in sacrificial offerings in traditional communities.
In indigenous Quechua, they are referred as jaca
or saca, and in Ayamara the word is wanku.
However, most people in the central Andes call
them cuy. Other known terms in South America
are cobayo and conejito de Indias.
As part of the family Caviidae, guinea pigs
present a particular dental formula: Teeth cheeks
are ever growing and have two enamel prisms
with sharp folds and angular projections. They
have four toes on the front feet, three on the
hind feet, and the tail is extremely reduced.
The adult guinea pig weighs approximately
750 g and is on average 30-cm long. The most
common colors are white, brown, and gray.
Their life span is 5–7 years. Puberty occurs
Guinea Pig: Domestication
at roughly 70 days of age. The gestation period is
generally 10–12 weeks, and litters are usually
composed of two to four pups. A few days after
birth, young cuys are able to care for themselves.
Fertilization takes places again shortly after a
female produces a litter. Pups and pregnant cuys
do not need a special human care. In Andean
communities, they are generally kept inside the
kitchen (Fig. 2), and they are fed with alfalfa and
table waste such as potato peelings, grass, fresh
corncobs, and grains (Bolton 1979).
At sites like Ayamachay and Puente in the
Peruvian Andes, the association between man
and wild Cavia dates back as far as 10,000 years
Guinea Pig: Domestication, Fig. 1 Fried guinea pig
dish as served in a restaurant in Ayacucho, Peru
Guinea Pig:
Domestication, Fig. 2
Guinea pigs kept in a
kitchen, Ayacucho, Peru
3173 G
before present (Wing 1977). Changes from selec-
tion for large size were noted by measuring the
height of the jaw in the middle of the diastema.
Archaeological samples from Ayacucho and
Cuzco show that the most recent samples are the
most variable; the mean of the diastema measure-
ment shows a large and significant increase in
size over older samples. These changes are seen
by 3,000 BP at the Pikimachay cave in the Aya-
cucho Valley (Wing 1977). From this likely single
domestication center, they were then introduced to
sites outside of central Peru. While domestic
guinea pigs preceded Inca occupation in southern
Peru, northern Chile, and Ecuador (Stahl 2003; G
Sportorno et al. 2007), their presence in northwest
Argentina appeared to be due to the Inca occupa-
tion (Rodriguez Loredo 1997-1998).
Two wild ancestors of the domestic guinea
pig have been suggested: Cavia tshudii and
Cavia aperea. The distribution of both wild spe-
cies extends from Colombia to Argentina, though
C. tshudii inhabits high altitude environments,
C. aperea inhabits the eastern lowlands. Both
Cavia species would have been good candidates
for domestication as they have high birth rates,
eat household refuse, and can easily be raised in
captivity: important elements of pre-adaptation
to domestication. Both species produce fertile
hybrids when crossed with C. porcellus (Gade
1967). However, skull morphology (Wing 1977)
G 3174
and recent molecular analysis of cytochrome
b (Spotorno et al. 2004) suggests that the wild
species C. tschudii from western South America,
and not C. aperea, is the ancestor of the domes-
ticated species, C. porcellus.
Wild cuys were surely attracted to human
refuse in caves or other early settlements. People
realized they were a good source of meat and
probably encouraged wild cuys to stay around
the house by giving them food scrapes. They
were eventually brought into the kitchen areas
where they received warmth, food, and protection
until when, finally accustomed, they started
reproducing in captivity (Gade 1967).
Given their small size, the domestication of
guinea pigs does not seem to be related to
increases in their meat productivity. They do not
provide secondary products such as milk, leather,
or wool. Yet cuy manure is a rich fertilizer. It is
collected to nourish orchards, and cornfields in
the Andes. Manure may have also been used as
fuel, although it would have been needed in large
quantities.
A cultural ecological analysis has been used to
explain the successful introduction of guinea pigs
in the Andean diet as environmentally deter-
mined. Data recorded in Cuzco (Peru) shows
that cuys are primarily eaten during Christmas,
Carnival, Easter, and Corpus Christi (Bolton
1979). It has been claimed that major communal
fiestas in rural Andean Peru serve guinea pigs to
distribute proteins during the wet season, Novem-
ber through April, the time of greatest protein
need in Southern Peru (Bolton 1979). However,
this explanation does not take into account other
sources of protein common in rural Peru today,
namely, the introduced chicken and pigs, and the
native camelids. Furthermore, this explanation
does not consider the need for fat and carbohy-
drates in the Andean human diet.
Another explanation for the domestication and
incorporation of guinea pigs in the Andean diet is
the fact that they represented an additional source
of fat, especially during the wet season when
carbohydrates and grain proteins were short in
supply (Rosenfeld 2008). Guinea pig meat is
7.8 % fat, as a weight-based proportion of the
edible meat. This is not a high fat value but it
Guinea Pig: Domestication
could have been crucial as an additional source to
that of camelids, particularly during certain times
of the year and especially to the most needy
segment of the human population (infants, preg-
nant, and nursing women). When carbohydrates
are not abundant, humans must switch to animal
fat as an energy source and/or synthesize energy
from protein. Therefore, when carbohydrates
were in short supply during the wet season of
the Andes, guinea pigs could have provided the
fat needed to help metabolize animal protein in
order to have a balanced diet (Rosenfeld 2008).
Cross-References
▶ Animal Domestication and Pastoralism:
Socio-Environmental Contexts
▶ Domestication: Definition and Overview
▶ Genetics of Animal Domestication: Recent
Advances
References
BOLTON, R. 1979. Guinea pigs, protein, and ritual. Ethnol-
ogy XVIII: 229- 52.
GADE, D.W. 1967. The guinea pig in Andean folk culture.
The Geographical Review 57: 213- 24.
RODRIGUEZ-LOREDO, C. 1997-1998. Estudio
arqueozoologico del sitio inca Potrero-Chaquiago,
barrios La Solana y Retambay, Andalgala, pcia de
Catamarca (Argentina). Relaciones de la Sociedad
Argentina de Antropologia XXII-XXIII: 203-45.
ROSENFELD, S.A. 2008. Delicious guinea pigs: seasonality
studies and the use of fat in the pre-Columbian Andean
diet. Quaternary International 180: 127-34.
SPOTORNO, A.E., J. P. VALLADARES, J.C. MARIN & H.
ZEBALLOS. 2004. Molecular diversity among domestic
guinea pigs (Cavia porcellus) and their close phyloge-
netic relationship with the Andean wild species
Caviatschudii. Revista Chilena de Historia Natural
77: 243-50.
SPORTORNO, A., G. MANRIQUEZ, A. FERNANDEZ, J. C.
MARIN, F. GONZALES & J. WHELEER. 2007. Domestica-
tion of guinea pigs from a southern Peru- northern
Chile wild species and their middle pre-Columbian
mummies, in D. Kelt, E. Lessa, J. Salazar-Bravo & J.
Patton (ed.) The quintessential naturalist: honoring
the life and legacy of Oliver Pearson (UC Publications
in Zoology): 367-88. Berkeley: University of Califor-
nia Press.
STAHL, P. 2003. Pre-Columbian Andean animal domesti-
cates at the edge of empire. World Archaeology
34: 470- 83.
Gwion Gwion
WING, E. S. 1977. Animal domestication in the Andes, in
C. A. Reed (ed.) Origins of agriculture: 827-59. The
Hague: Mouton Publishers.
Further Reading
ARCHETTI, E. 1997. Guinea pigs. Food, symbol and conflict
of knowledge in Ecuador. Oxford: Berg.
MORALES, E. 1995. The guinea pig. Healing, food, and
ritual in the Andes. Tucson: The University of Arizona
Press.
Gwion Gwion
Graeme K. Ward
Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres
Strait Islander Studies, Canberra, ACT, Australia
Introduction and Definition
Gwion as Ancestors and Images
The term “Gwion” refers to a type of figurative
pictogram found in northwestern Australia, espe-
cially the sandstone of the Kimberley Plateau.
Typically, but not exclusively, the form of the
paintings appears to be elegant “humans”; they
are depicted in various poses, and appear to be
wearing “wigs” and carrying items in their
“hands” or attached to their “bodies” (Fig. 1).
Often the figures are grouped in apparent scenes;
both as single figures and in groups, the stance
and orientation of many is suggestive of dance or
ceremonial activity. Typically, the depiction is of
small, slender figures, outlined and in-filled pro-
files, whose finely executed painting was
achieved by delicate brush-work. Gwion figures
are usually a wine red, a hue that has been
described as “cherry” or “mulberry-colored.”
Their subject matter and method of execution
may be contrasted with those of the much larger,
more boldly wrought Wanjina figures; the distri-
butions of the two overlap. Not dissimilar figures
are found to the northeast in the Keep River and
Fitzmaurice River regions, and it has been
suggested that they are related to the Mimi figures
of Arnhem Land, and that in the ancient past,
there was a shared cultural area joined by the
3175 G
extensive coastal plain of northwestern and
northern Australia that is now a shallow sea.
The region includes the traditional lands of the
Ngarinyin; adjacent languages groups are the
Wunambul and the Worora. The Ngarinyin term
for the figures is “Gwion Gwion,” sometimes writ-
ten “Guyon” or “Kwion”; the Wunambul and
Worora use linguistically similar descriptors
(Ngarinyin are the largest language group).
Some commentators have seen the Gwion as
“mysterious” and even as having been produced
by non-Aboriginal cultures or even “alien beings.”
Such a “mystery” if it ever existed has been
“solved” by research conducted in collaboration G
with four senior Ngarinyin traditional owners,
munnumburra (initiated men, “lawmen”). The
verbal testimony of the Pathway Project was
recorded on-site in painted shelters and published
in an illustrated book entitled Gwion Gwion:
Dulwan Mamaa. Secret and Sacred Pathways of
the Ngarinyin Aboriginal People of Australia
(Ngarjno et al. 2000: 14).
Essentially, Gwion are (depictions of) ances-
tral beings and are treated with great respect;
they are not spoken of lightly. It needs to be
recalled that people were frightened of ances-
tors, who were powerful enough to hurt or to kill
them (e.g., Ngarjno et al. 2000: 27, 83); they
exercised great caution in approaching the
painted images (e.g., Ngarjno et al. 2000: 38).
They were secretive about them, to the extent
that some commentators thought and regrettably
still publish that the local people knew nothing
of them. It is evident, however, that the Gwion
are an integral part of the cosmology and social
history of the Ngarinyin and others, and that they
are part of their continuing cultural heritage has
been recognized formally by granting of native
title rights.
“Gwion” is both the term for the original
humans born from the “Great Mother Jillinya”
and who inhabited a land without boundaries
(Ngarjno et al. 2000: 36), and, secondly, the cor-
pus of painted images created by the ancestors.
The subject of the Gwion paintings is “law.”
Gwion were inventors of hunting technology –
of stone tools, spears, and woomera (Ngarjno
et al. 2000: 85, 93, 209, 232); Munga.nunga is a