Skip to main content
10 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Jul 14, 2018 at 12:03 vote accept Lars Bosteen
Jul 13, 2018 at 14:34 answer added DavePhD timeline score: 10
Apr 22, 2018 at 23:12 review Suggested edits
Apr 23, 2018 at 0:51
Jan 15, 2018 at 22:18 history tweeted twitter.com/StackHistory/status/953028657441845254
Jan 14, 2018 at 20:30 comment added justCal Sorry, missed the link to the article: Genome sequencing of the extinct Eurasian wild aurochs...
Jan 14, 2018 at 20:16 comment added justCal Remember there is a difference between extinct and extirpated. A species which is no longer found on Britain, but still present on mainland Europe , as records indicate, can still have individuals imported from the other population at a later date. this article might indicate such activity.
Jan 14, 2018 at 14:54 comment added sempaiscuba I'm guessing it's the excavations mentioned on page 6 of SMA 41. The summary doesn't mention Aurochs at all though. I guess that "very large distal tibia" could still be from large domesticated cattle.
Jan 14, 2018 at 14:18 comment added Lars Bosteen I'm mostly curious about the potential Marston Park find. I assume that, at the time she submitted her thesis, further info was not available. That was around 4 years ago so I'm wondering if the Mark Maltby reference has produced any results since then.
Jan 14, 2018 at 13:36 comment added sempaiscuba Note that on page 93 of her thesis, Elizabeth Wright observes that "British data are available from Marine Isotope Stage 9 to the Bronze Age, when the aurochs is thought to have gone extinct in Britain.". I'm not aware of any published results that contradict that.
Jan 14, 2018 at 8:24 history asked Lars Bosteen CC BY-SA 3.0