An investigation into the native status of the polecat and criteria to separate their skeletal remains from those of ferrets (Frazer Bowen)

An investigation into the native status of the polecat and criteria to separate their skeletal remains from those of ferrets (Frazer Bowen)

The polecat (Mustela putorius) is widely considered to be native to Britain, while the ferret (Mustela putorius furo) is thought to be a medieval arrival: the ‘received wisdom’ is that ferrets were introduced by the Normans. However, in a 2002 article, Duncan Brown suggested, on the basis of place-name evidence, that the polecat may not be native to Britain, potentially having been introduced at the same time as the ferret (Brown 2002). To examine Brown’s suggestion from a zooarchaeological perspective, records of reported archaeological specimens of both animals have been collated on a database. The rationale for the database is two-fold. First it has been created to demonstrate when polecat remains begin to appear in the archaeological record: the presence of well-dated specimens from Neolithic, Iron Age, Roman or Saxon contexts would disprove Brown’s theory. Second, the database is being used to refine our understanding of timing and circumstances of the ferret’s introduction. Differentiating between remains of polecats and ferrets can be problematic so, to complement the database, metric and morphological data have been collected from modern reference specimens. These morphometric results are being used to re-examine previous biological studies on the subject. The creation of morphometric criteria for confidently identifying the archaeological remains of these two animals will make a significant contribution to both the fields of zooarchaeology and natural history.

Brown, D. 2002. ‘The foulmart: what’s in a name?’ Mammal Review 32 (2) 145-149.

Frazer Bowen, University of Nottingham

No