DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.18550522
title: Supplementary dataset Cianfoni & Minniti 2026 Equid Remains from the Domus Tiberiana (Rome): A Morphological and Biometric Assessment

description: Supplementary material Minniti & Cianfoni 2026 Equid Remains from the Domus Tiberiana (Rome): A Morphological and Biometric Assessment

S1This dataset contains linear measurements of equid metacarpals used for the comparative biometric analyses presented in Minniti & Cianfoni 2026. The table includes both modern reference specimens and archaeological individuals from the Domus Tiberiana (Rome), enabling direct comparison between securely identified taxa and the Roman assemblage under study.

For each specimen, the dataset records: Status (modern or archaeological), Taxonomic attribution (horse, donkey, mule), Specimen type, Analyst, Museum or laboratory inventory number, Greatest Length (GL), Smallest Breadth of the Diaphysis (SD).

Measurements of the archaeological specimens were taken directly by the authors following the standardized protocol of von den Driesch (1976). Measurements of the modern reference specimens are derived from two published biometric datasets widely used in equid studies: Eisenmann V., 1986 – Comparative osteology of modern and fossil horses, half-asses, and asses. In: Meadow R.H., Uerpmann H.-P. (eds.), Equids in the ancient world. Beihefte zum Tübinger Atlas des Vorderen Orients, Reihe A (Naturwissenschaften) 19/1, Dr. Ludwig Reichert Verlag, Wiesbaden: 67–116. Johnstone C.J., 2004 – A biometric study of equids in the Roman world. PhD thesis, University of York, Department of Archaeology.

S2

This dataset comprises detailed dental biometric measurements of equid maxillae from the Domus Tiberiana assemblage analyzed in Minniti & Cianfoni 2026.  All dental measurements follow the protocol defined by Payne S., 1991 – Early Holocene equids from Tall-i-Mushki (Iran) and Can Hasan III (Turkey). In: Meadow R.H., Uerpmann H.-P. (eds.), Equids in the ancient world, vol. II. Dr. Ludwig Reichert Verlag, Wiesbaden: 132–164. 

The recorded variables include the following measurements (codes expanded below, after Johnstone 2004: 168 fig. 4.5):L: tooth height (see fig. 3 SD)

OL – Occlusal length, measured from the approximate centres of the mesial and distal sides, including the external cement

Be – Buccolingual length, measured with one jaw of the calliper in contact with both the parastyle and mesostyle and the other on the protocone, including enamel but excluding cement

Bapf – Distance by which the postfossette projects above the prefossette at right angles to OL (usually measured on enlarged photocopies)

LP – Greatest length of the protocone including enamel

B3 – Width from protoconid to metaconid at right angles to OL

B4 – Width from hypoconid to metastylid at right angles to OL

Lnd – Greatest length of the double knot including enamel

LF – Greatest length of the postflexid including enamel

Bei – Smallest distance between the internal enamel of the buccal sulcus and the lingual sulcus.Figure captions

Figure 2 SD – English

Skulls and mandibles of equids recovered from US 1037, showing proposed and uncertain associations. Roman numerals (I–VI) indicate skulls, while capital letters (A–G) identify mandibles or hemimandibles. Secure associations are indicated by vertical alignment (I–A, III–B, IV–E, and VI–C), supported by spatial proximity and age-at-death compatibility. Skulls II and V, mandible D, and hemimandibles F and G could not be confidently associated; the latter likely belong to the same mandible, although no corresponding cranium with a compatible age-at-death was identified. The question mark highlights uncertain attributions. Scale bars as shown.

Figure 3 SD – English

Upper (top) and lower (bottom) molar crown height measurements plotted against estimated age-at-death classes for equid individuals from US 1037. Boxplots summarise the distribution of crown height values within each age class, while coloured symbols represent individual skulls (upper dentition; I–IV) and mandibles (lower dentition; A, B, E, F, and G).Schematic drawings illustrating the crown height measurement protocol are shown on the right. Measurements were taken following Fernández & Legendre (2003). The drawings are modified from Figure 3 of Fernández & Legendre (2003).https://doi.org/10.1016/S0305-4403(03)00054-2

Figure 5 SD– English

Protocone index values ((LP × 100)/OL) calculated for upper cheek teeth (P3–M3) of selected equid individuals from the Domus Tiberiana. Coloured lines represent individual skulls (I–IV). The inset illustrates the measurements used to compute the index, following Eisenmann (1986). 

Figure 7 SD – English

Posterior view of the distal ends of equid metacarpals from the Domus Tiberiana (specimens 6, 153, 175, 784, 1285, 1287, and 155). Images on the right indicate the diagnostic criteria (MC1A and MC2A) used for taxonomic assessment, after Hanot & Bochaton (2018: 17, fig. 3C).

Figure 8 SD – English

Selected equid metacarpals and vertebrae from the Domus Tiberiana assemblage showing pathological alterations. The metacarpals on the right display extensive fusion of metapodials II and IV and marked osseous exostoses, consistent with chronic mechanical stress.