123

FISH ASSEMBLAGES
IN EARLY MEDIEVAL PERIODS

Sónia Gabriel

Abstract
L’articolo descrive le specie di pesci ritrovate nello scavo presso il battistero del Duomo di Padova,
principalmente afferenti al periodo IIIa. Interpretati come resti di pasto, questi materiali suggeriscono
una dieta basata su pesci d’acqua dolce come lucci e ciprinidi, come del resto indicano anche le altre
evidenze archeologiche e documentarie riguardanti l’importanza delle risorse d’acqua dolce nell’alto
medioevo. Viene inoltre in particolare discussa la presenza della carpa, poiché questa potrebbe essere
una delle prime evidenze dell’introduzione dell’allevamento della carpa in Italia.
Keywords: approvvigionamento di pesce, tarda antichità, post-medioevo, luccio (Esox lucius), carpa
(Cyprinus carpio)

1. Background and aims

Excavations at the Baptistery of the Cathedral of Padova yielded small fish sam-
ples ranging in date from Late Antiquity to the post-Medieval periods. For the most
part the materials derive from the 6th century AD (period IIIa) and Longobard periods
(7th-8th centuries AD; period IIIb). These samples are of particular interest, as little
information on fish assemblages is known for that period in Northern Italy.
The main aim of this study is to deliver the fish bone analysis, and place the data
within a wider context of Early Medieval subsistence and fish procurement. Within
a global archaeofaunal approach this information may also be used to address ques-
tions regarding the organization of food supply in the early medieval city.

2. Material and methods

The fish assemblage was recovered using different techniques, including hand
picking, sieving and flotation. All bones and bone fragments were included in counts.
Bones were identified using the reference collections at the LARC (Laboratório
de Arqueociências - Archaeosciences Laboratory), and the KBIN (Koninklijk Belgisch
Instituut voor Natuurwetenschappen - Royal Belgian Institute for Natural Sciences).
Specific literature was consulted for cyprinids1. No effort of identification was made
for pleural ribs, pterygiophores, fin spines, fin rays, scales and fragments with no di-
agnostic traits.
The specimens were quantified using the Number of identified specimens (Nisp),
which consists of the raw bone counts per taxon. The minimum number of individu- 1
Miranda, Escala 2003 and 2005; Pasco-
als (MNI) estimates was also attempted using paired elements. Vertebrae were Viel et al. 2010.
 124

Tab. 1. Distribution of the fish as- Date Period Phase SU Nisp ND Total
semblage: Number of specimens 4th century I 347 1 1 2
identified (Nisp) and unidentified
fish remains (ND) in each strati- 6th-7th century III a 222 10 5 15
graphic unit (SU). *Counts include 226 26 255* 281
high number of scales (n= 247). 293 2 2
340 15 7 22
344 1 4 5
7th-8th century b 330 1 1 2
219=323 18 8 26
8th-10th century c 261=290 1 3 4
270=294 2 3 5
10th-13th century IV 134 3 9 12
230 3 3
238 1 1
259 3 1 4
V a 246 1 10 11
14th-16th century VI b 214 3 3
139 2 2
103 1 15 16
TOTAL 86 330 416

also considered when their features and size permitted assignment to species
and/or location in the vertebral column. To avoid distortion in the estimated MNI,
intra-species bone size was considered.
Measurements on various skeletal elements were taken according to Morales,
Rosenlund2 and Miranda, Escala3.
The approximate size of fish was determined by comparing the fish remains to
reference specimens of known length. Size estimates refer to the total length of fish
(TL) as measured from the tip of the snout to the edge of the tail.
Species and higher taxonomic categories are listed according to the taxonomic
sequence listed in Maitland, Linsell4. English and corresponding scientific names are
listed in tab. 3. In some cases, simplified names are used in the text; for example
the Common carp is referred to simply as ‘carp’.
Natural and cultural alterations were also recorded in the attempt to recognise
the agents responsible for the accumulation of the fish assemblages.

3. Results

On the whole the assemblages consists of 416 fish remains of which 86 (21%)
were identified to taxonomic level. It is worth noticing that the unidentified portion is
somehow magnified by the recovery of numerous small scales (N= 247) found in
the flotation samples from SU 226 (tab. 1).
The fish findings consist of 267 scales (64%), 47 cranial elements (11%), 40
vertebrae (10%) and 36 fin bones and ribs (9%). The remnant 26 (6%) were not
assigned to anatomic level (tab. 2).
Fish remains are almost exclusively freshwater taxa, including cyprinids, pike and
salmonids. The presence of mullets, a chiefly marine group of fishes that also include
freshwater fish, is also present (tab. 3).
2
Morales, Rosenlund 1979. The materials are well preserved, showing consistent preservation degree. The
3
Miranda, Escala 2005. presence of a few burned bones and cut marks suggests that humans were agents
4
Maitland, Linsell 2006. responsible for the accumulation.
 125

Unidentified
Bone / side

BRSTR

TOTAL
Scales
CRHY
HMD

BASI
POP

SOP

PAS
ART

VRT
PLT

OP
DT

Ph
CL
Q
Taxon

Und.

Und.

Und.
R

R
L

L
Cyprinus 1 1 2
carpio
cf. Squalius sp. 1 1 1 3
cf. Rutilus sp. 1 1
Cyprinidae 1 2 3 3 1 13 23
cf. Cyprinidae 1 1 2 4
Esox lucius 2 2 1 2 3 3 1 1 1 22 38
cf. Esox lucius 1 1 1 3
Esocidae 1 1
cf. Esocidae 1 2 1 1 3 1 9
Salmonidae 1 1
cf. Mugilidae 1 1
Unidentified 2 1 34 267 26 330
TOTAL 2 4 1 0 2 0 6 1 1 3 1 1 1 0 1 2 0 1 1 0 1 3 5 3 5 34 2 40 267 26 416

3.1. The 6th-7th century fish assemblage Tab. 2. Fish bone elements in the
whole assemblage. Key to Bone/
Fish remains are more frequent in period IIIa, corresponding to the destruction side: DT-dentary; ART-articular; Q-
quadrate; CL-Cleithrum; PLT-Pala-
level of the building II. The assemblage consists of 353 remains of which 71 (52%) tine; HMD-Hyomandibular; POP-
were identified to taxonomic level. Fish remains are exclusively freshwater taxa, in- preopercular; OP-opercular; SOP-
cluding carp, chub, roach and pike (tab. 3). subopercular; CRHY-ceratohyal;
Ph-Pharyngeal bone; PAS-paras-
Pike phenoid; BRST-branchiostegal ray;
BASI-basioccipital; VRT-vertebrae;
Pike is the most common taxon followed by cyprinids, based on Nisp it stands for L-left; R-right; Und.-undetermined.
50% (N= 28) of the fish identified in the 6th-7th century assemblage. Calculations of
the MNI endorse the relative importance of pike (tab. 3). Fish lengths estimated by
comparison with reference specimens suggests that at least four individuals are
present in the assemblage (tab. 3). The bone elements (dentary, articular, quadrate,
hyomandibular, palatine, cleithrum, basioccipital and vertebrae) and their measure-
ments are listed in tab. 4. Lengths estimated show the presence of mid-to-large
specimens ranging between 34-47 cm TL (MNI= 1); 47-67 cm TL (MNI= 1); and
≥67 cm TL (MNI= 2). The pike can grow up to 150 cm TL, although it is common at
55 cm TL5.
Five vertebrae present signs of burning, and one cleithrum is chopped on its dor-
sal incisure. Albeit minor in number this butchery mark may indicate some type of
processing, possibly the discarding of the pectoral fins, or any other processing of
the fish head.

Cyprinids
The 21 cyprinid bones in the 6th-7th century AD assemblage are from a minimum
of four individuals, representing different fish taxa. The most commonly identified
taxa are the carp, the chub and the roach, based on the Nisp (tab. 3).
The carp stands for 14,3% (MNI= 1) of the fish found in the late antique period
(tab. 3). The bones analysed (one pharyngeal and one opercular) compare well to
the Cyprinus carpio specimens in the reference collection (fig. 1). The fish bone
measurements are listed in tab. 4. Fish lengths assessed by comparison with mod- 5
Froese, Pauly 2016.
ern specimens indicates the presence of one fish greater than 44 cm TL. The carp 6
Froese, Pauly 2016.
126

Fig. 1. Comparing left preopercu-

lar bones (lateral view) of carp,
Cyprinus carpio. From left to right:
specimen 90p found at strati-

1 cm
graphic unit 226 (6th-7th century
AD); reference material numbers
1104 (44 cm TL/ 793 g), 1106
(40 cm TL/ 717 g) and 1105
(37 cm TL/ 405 g). Photographs:
José Paulo Ruas (DGPC – Di-
recção Geral do Património Cul-
tural).

Per. I Per. IIIa [6th-7th c.] Per. IIIb [7th-8th c.] Per. IIIc Per. IV Per. Va Per. VIb
Taxon/Group Nisp % Nisp % MNI % Nisp % MNI % Nisp % Nisp % Nisp % Nisp %
Carp Family CYPRINIDAE
Cyprinus
Common carp _ _ 2 3,8 1 14,3 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
carpio
cf. Squalius
Chub _ _ 2 3,8 1 14,3 1 5,3 1 33,3 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
sp.
Roach cf. Rutilus sp. _ _ 1 1,9 1 14,3 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Cyprinidae _ _ 13 25,0 _ _ 5 26,3 _ _ 1 33,3 2 33,3 _ _ 2 50,0
cf. Cyprinidae 1 100 3 5,8 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Pike Family ESOCIDAE
Pike Esox lucius _ _ 28 53,8 4 57,1 4 21,1 1 33,3 1 33,3 3 50,0 1 100 1 25,0
cf. Esox lucius _ _ 2 3,8 _ _ 1 5,3 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Esocidae _ _ 1 1,9 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
cf. Esocidae _ _ _ _ _ _ 7 36,8 _ _ _ _ 1 16,7 _ _ 1 25,0
Salmon Family SALMONIDAE
Salmon/Trout Salmonidae _ _ _ _ _ _ 1 5,3 1 33,3 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Grey Mullet Family MUGILIDAE
cf. Mugilidae _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 1 33,3 _ _ _ _ _ _

Total Identified 1 100 52 100 7 100 19 100 3 100 3 100 6 100 1 100 4 100
Unidentified fish 1 273 9 6 14 10 17
TOTAL 2 325 28

Tab. 3. Taxonomic distribution of
fish remains with special empha-
sis the periods IIIa and IIIb (6th-7th
and 7th-8th centuries AD). Percent-
ages are calculated only for the
identified portion.
is common at a total length of 31 cm, although it can grow up to 120 cm TL6.
Chub and roach represent each 14,3% (MNI= 1) of the fish found in period IIIa
(tab. 3). The elements identified as likely chub (a pair of pharyngeal bones); and roach
(one opercular), still need further work of identification using larger reference col-
lections.

3.2. The fish assemblage in period IIIb

The fish assemblage from period IIIb consist of 28 remains of which 19 (68%)
were identified to taxonomic level (tab. 2). These are exclusively freshwater fish, in-
cluding cyprinids, pike and salmonids (tab. 3).
 127

Pike
Pike and pike family are the most common taxa, followed by cyprinids and
salmonids, based on the Nisp. Calculation of the MNI reduces the relative impor-
tance of Pike (tab. 3). The pike bones identified are two vertebrae, one dentary and
one cleithrum belonging to a fish that measured some 67 cm TL. The fish bone
measurements are listed in tab. 4.

Chub and other cyprinids

Most of the cyprinid remains found in the 7th-8th century AD assemblage could
not be assigned below family level, or their identification was left with interrogation.
The materials analysed include five fragmented pharyngeal bones identified simply
as Cyprinidae (26,3% of the Nisp), and one opercular that could belong to a chub
(5,3% of the Nisp) (tab. 3).

Salmonids
A single salmonid vertebra (5,3% of the Nisp) was identified among the 7th-8th
century AD assemblage (tab. 3). It may well belong to a freshwater trout, Salmo
trutta, although no further identification was possible at this stage. River and lake
trout have been known to reach very large sizes, range 50 cm and over 1 m re-
spectively7.

4. Discussion

Taphonomy
Beyond methodological issues such as the recovery methods and the sampling
efforts, fish remains found in archaeological sites are the ultimate result of broad
taphonomic pathways that also include fishing, consumption, and preservation. The
location of the site and the archaeological context itself suggest that the fish re-
mains must represent consumption refuse, and excludes the possibility that we are 2 cm
dealing with the remains of natural death, while the presence of a few cut marks
and burned elements also indicates the interference of humans.
Experiments on fish bones, evaluating how rising temperatures affect the colour
and the macroscopic appearance of bone8, indicate that the fish have been exposed Fig. 2. Comparing right pharyn-
geal bones of carp, Cyprinus car-
to temperatures no higher than 200º C. This assumption, however, does not exclude pio: A – medial view; B – lateral
that bones have also been burned at higher temperatures but those elements have view. From top to bottom: speci-
not survived within the local soil. The consumption leftovers must have been thrown men 173p found at stratigraphic
into a fire, unless we are dealing with specimens that one attempted to smoke (for unit 226 (6th-7th century AD); ref-
food conservation). On the other hand it is also possible that leftovers have been erence material numbers 1104
(44 cm TL/ 793 g), 1105 (37
burned because of fire lit on the spot where bones were deposited.
cm TL/ 405 g) and 1106 (40 cm
TL/ 717 g). Photographs: José
Biotope exploitation and fish consumption Paulo Ruas (DGPC – Direcção
It is interesting to note that almost all the identified fish bones in the early medieval Geral do Património Cultural).
periods at the excavation by the Baptistery of the Cathedral of Padua are from fresh-
water fish, an evidence that tends to reach agreement with archaeological and doc-
umentary evidence regarding the importance of freshwater resources in the Early
Medieval Period.
The few fish remains recovered at the excavation by the Baptistery of the Cathe-
dral of Padua’s 7th and 8th century AD includes mostly mid-to-large size pike, cyprinids
(carp, chub and roach) and salmonids (possibly trout). Some of the taxa have also
been sought after at S. Giulia (Brescia) all through the Longobard period and after, 7
Mojetta 1990.
during the 9th-10th centuries AD9: pike, cyprinids (mainly tench, Tinca tinca), and 8
Nicholson 1993.
salmonids. 9
Baker 1999.
 128

Provenance Inventory Bone Side Taxon AFA D4 PLT2 POP1 POP2 Q3 V1 V2 V3

134 _ _ 128P Palatine R Esox lucius (Pike) _ _ 10,96 _ _ _ _ _ _
147/1 _ _ 120P First vertebra _ Esox lucius (Pike) _ _ _ _ _ _ 8,98 9,34 4,64
164 _ _ 4P Dentary R Esox lucius (Pike) _ 6,88 _ _ _ _ _ _ _
214 _ _ 155P Dentary R Esox lucius (Pike) _ 4,53 _ _ _ _ _ _ _
219 _ _ 59P Vertebra (35-46) _ Esox lucius (Pike) _ _ _ _ _ _ 11,60 12,06 9,13
219 _ _ 60P Dentary L Esox lucius (Pike) _ 2,84 _ _ _ _ _ _ _
222 _ _ 102P Vertebra (20-27) _ Esox lucius (Pike) _ _ _ _ _ _ 11,46 14,32 8,81
222 _ _ 103P Caudal vertebra _ Esox lucius (Pike) _ _ _ _ _ _ 9,03 9,19 6,31
222 _ _ 101P Vertebra (1-5) _ Esox lucius (Pike) _ _ _ _ _ _ 13,39 15,65 8,24
226 _ _ 89E Basioccipital _ Esox lucius (Pike) _ _ _ _ _ _ 10,21 14,05 _
226 _ _ 92P Quadrate L Esox lucius (Pike) _ _ _ _ _ 6,36 _ _ _
226 _ _ 91P Quadrate L Esox lucius (Pike) _ _ _ _ _ 11,50 _ _ _
226 _ _ 94P Articular L Esox lucius (Pike) _ _ _ _ _ 5,59 _ _ _
226 _ _ 78P Vertebra (1-5) _ Esox lucius (Pike) _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 11,58 _
226 _ _ 86P Vertebra (5-16) _ Esox lucius (Pike) _ _ _ _ _ _ 9,92 10,69 7,54
226 _ _ 79P Vertebra (1-4) _ Esox lucius (Pike) _ _ _ _ _ _ 13,75 14,92 7,49
226 _ _ 80P Vertebra (5-6) _ Esox lucius (Pike) _ _ _ _ _ _ 10,35 15,10 9,08
226 _ _ 81P Vertebra (4-9) _ Esox lucius (Pike) _ _ _ _ _ _ 10,78 13,95 9,77
226 _ _ 85P Vertebra (10-25) _ Esox lucius (Pike) _ _ _ _ _ _ 11,87 10,12 9,33
226 _ _ 82P Vertebra (27-40) _ Esox lucius (Pike) _ _ _ _ _ _ 10,58 10,72 9,71
226 _ _ 84P Vertebra (27-40) _ Esox lucius (Pike) _ _ _ _ _ _ 9,39 9,41 8,33
226 SW _ 9 Vertebra (38-44) _ Esox lucius (Pike) _ _ _ _ _ _ 4,43 4,31 4,36
226 SW _ 9 Vertebra caudal _ Esox lucius (Pike) _ _ _ _ _ _ 3,78 3,19 3,54
226 SW _ 9 Vertebra caudal _ Esox lucius (Pike) _ _ _ _ _ _ 3,27 3,00 3,03
246 _ _ 56P Vertebra (3-7?) _ Esox lucius (Pike) _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 12,94 7,53
Campione
259 SE 6 Vertebra(2-4) _ Esox lucius (Pike) _ _ _ _ _ _ 3,60 3,95 2,62
di terra 8
Campione
259 SE 6 Caudal vertebra _ Esox lucius (Pike) _ _ _ _ _ _ 3,11 3,52 2,52
di terra 8
261 _ _ 51P Vertebra (5-16) _ Esox lucius (Pike) _ _ _ _ _ _ 13,25 14,75 10,08
272 _ _ 35P Precaudal vertebra _ Esox lucius (Pike) _ _ _ _ _ _ 10,29 11,97 7,67
272 _ _ 36P Precaudal vertebra _ Esox lucius (Pike) _ _ _ _ _ _ 8,29 8,62 6,11
323 _ _ 75 Vertebra 5-7 _ Esox lucius (Pike) _ _ _ _ _ _ 9,23 10,08 6,36
340 _ _ 136P Dentary L Esox lucius (Pike) _ 6,40 _ _ _ _ _ _ _
340 _ _ 135P Dentary R Esox lucius (Pike) _ 6,73 _ _ _ _ _ _ _
340 _ _ 140P First vertebra _ Esox lucius (Pike) _ _ _ _ _ _ 14,03 13,82 7,41
340 _ _ 139P First vertebra _ Esox lucius (Pike) _ _ _ _ _ _ 11,19 11,98 5,36
340 _ _ 151P Palatine L Esox lucius (Pike) _ _ 9,79 _ _ _ _ _ _
344 _ _ 168P Palatine R Esox lucius (Pike) _ _ 9,70 _ _ _ _ _ _

164 _ _ 1P Pharyngeal R Cyprinus carpio (Carp) 34,02 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

164 _ _ 2P Pharyngeal L Cyprinus carpio (Carp) 36,28 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
164 _ _ 3P Pharyngeal L Cyprinus carpio (Carp) _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
164 _ _ 6P Preopercular L Cyprinus carpio (Carp) _ _ _ 48,08 51,05 _ _ _ _
226 _ _ 173P Pharyngeal R Cyprinus carpio (Carp) _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Tab. 4. Fish bone measurements. Key to bone measurements: AFA – Articulation axis height (following Miranda, Escala 2005
); C2 – Chord length; DT4 – Anterior height; POP1 – Greatest dorso-ventral height, measured on a three contact point system;
POP2– Chord length; PLT2 – Greatest height; Q3 – Greatest medio-lateral breadth of the articular surface; V1 – Greatest dorso-
ventral height of the centrum, measured in cranial view; V2 – Greatest medio-lateral breadth of the centrum, measured in cranial
view; V3 – Greatest cranio-caudal length of the centrum, measured in lateral view (following Morales, Rosenlund 1979).
 129

According to Hoffmann10, by the 5th or 6th century AD, the newly dominant Chris-
tianity had a scale of taboos on eating “flesh”, but western Christians allowed most
people to substitute fish on those days of the year when ideology forbade them to
eat meat. In addition, this author also points out that high social rank was recogniz-
ably displayed by a table with large fresh fishes caught locally, specifying that
Prelates, for instance, were keen on pike.

Ecology
The pike suggests that several habitats could have been fished, especially small
lakes, shallow vegetated areas of larger lakes, marshes, creeks, and small to large
rivers11. Such environments may have been available within easy reach of Padua, at
the Bacchiglione and Brenta rivers, possibly providing the range of taxa represented
at the excavated area.
The presence of carp here is quite interesting considering the debate surround-
ing its distribution in Europe from the Roman to the Medieval periods12. The species
is native to the Black, Caspian and Aral Sea basins, and the first cultivated stocks
could be derived from the wild form of the Danube13. Although in the book De Re
Rustica Varro and Columella mention the use of pools to farm fish, there is no ar-
chaeological evidence for the introduction and domestication of carp in Italy prior
to the Middle Ages.
To date, carp has been identified in Molino Casarotto, a Neolithic site in the Berici
hills region of Northern Italy14. If it was locally fished both at Molino Casarotto and in
the excavation by the Baptistery of the Cathedral of Padua, this evidence would raise
questions regarding the species status and distribution in Northern Italy. The pres-
ence of carp in the early medieval assemblages in the excavation by the Baptistery of
the Cathedral of Padua could also be one of the earlier evidences for the introduction
of carp culture to Italy. These hypothesis, however, do not exclude that the fish were
received with other products (dried, smoked, or lightly preserved) from localities in
the Austrian and Hungarian Danube, were the carp could be caught in the wild form15.

5. Concluding remarks

The archaeozoological remains from the excavation by the Baptistery of the

Cathedral of Padua yield great potential for interpretations upon the food economy
of Early Middle Ages, although in this case the analyses was limited by the small
number of fish remains found in the early medieval periods (from the 6th to the 8th
centuries AD). If no bias was introduced in bone recovery, fish diet appears to be
based upon freshwater species like pike and cyprinids, perhaps indicating the pres-
ence of high status social groups.
This first approach should in the future be enlarged by incorporating material
from other sites in Padua and Italy. This could even drastically change our view on
what happened in the region regarding the introduction and culture of carp.

Acknowledgements

The analysis discussed in this report was undertaken from July 15th to August Hoffmann 2005.
10

1st 2016 at the LARC. Access to supplementary reference material was kindly pro- Natureserve 2013.
11

Hoffmann 1994a, 1994b, 1995,

vided by Wim van Neer and Wim Wourters (KBIN-RBINS), to whom I particularly
12

1996, 2005.
thank. The final identifications are sole responsibility of the author. Acknowledge- 13
Freyhof, Kottelat 2008.
ments are also due to José Paulo Ruas (DGPC) for the outstanding photos pre- 14
Boyle 2014.
sented in the figures. 15
Galik et al. 2015.