Oldest evidence of domestic dogs discovered in Europe and Türkiye

Domestic dogs are thought to have diverged from their wolf ancestors sometime during the last Ice Age. Now, research has pushed back the earliest genetic evidence for dogs by more than 5,000 years.

The study, which has been published in Nature, examined prehistoric wolf-like fossils dating between 15,800 and 14,300 years ago. DNA analysis of the remains has revealed a breakthrough in our understanding of the early relationship between humans and our canine companions.

Dr William Marsh is a researcher at the Natural History Museum and a lead author of the study.

“We ran DNA analysis on several specimens from the museum’s fossil mammal collection that had been excavated from Gough’s Cave, an important archaeological site in Somerset,” explains William. “We found that one of them was genetically closer to a dog than a wolf. This was a fantastic finding that, at the time, represented the oldest empirical evidence of dogs.”

William and his colleagues later joined forces with a larger research team based at the University of Oxford, the University of York and the Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich in Germany. They then discovered even older dog remains at another cave site in Pınarbaşı, central Türkiye, as well as at three other sites in Central Europe.

“The genetic identification of two Palaeolithic dogs from Gough’s Cave and Pınarbaşı represents a step-change in our understanding of the earliest dogs,” says William. “These specimens allowed us to identify additional ancient dogs from sites in Germany, Italy and Switzerland, which clearly show that dogs were already widely dispersed across Europe and Türkiye by at least 14,000 years ago.”

“Remarkably, we found that all these dogs were genetically very similar, even though they were discovered thousands of miles apart and associated with humans who were culturally, genetically and behaviourally very different.”

The early relationship between dogs and humans

Dogs were the first species to be domesticated by humans.

Scientists believe they diverged from grey wolf populations sometime between 20,000 and 40,000 years ago. This was long before the advent of agriculture, when humans were living as nomadic hunter-gatherers.

During the early phases of domestication, the skeletons of dogs and wolves are almost indistinguishable. But more can be learned from looking at their genetics.

Despite sharing a recent common ancestor, the DNA of wolves and dogs is extremely different. This means that through genetic testing, researchers can easily distinguish whether a specimen is a dog or a wolf.

By around 15,000 years ago, the differences in the DNA between dogs and wolves was clear enough to genetically distinguish them. This is what has allowed researchers to confirm that the canine fossils from the UK and Türkiye belonged to dogs and not their wild ancestors.

Dr Selina Brace, ancient DNA researcher at the museum says, “Pushing the date of the earliest genetically identified dog back 5,000 years is a significant breakthrough.”

“Morphological analysis performed at the museum suggested dogs were present in Europe 15,000 years ago, but it's great to be able to confirm this with ancient DNA.”

The researchers also found evidence to suggest the dogs had a close relationship with the humans whose remains were also found at these sites.

Analysis of chemicals in the bones of the human and dog remains, known as dietary isotopes, showed that the people in Türkiye likely fed the dogs fish. This is the same food that the humas themselves were eating. There are also signs that the dogs may have been intentionally buried.

Evidence for similar interactions were also seen at Gough’s cave. The dog remains suggest they may have been manipulated after death in ways comparable to funerary practises observed in human remains at the site.

Dr Silvia Bello, a researcher at the Museum who was also an author of the study, says, “Our research into the earliest dogs sheds new light on the complex lives of hunter-gatherer communities at the end of the Ice Age.”

“By examining the close relationship between humans and dogs, we uncover the beginnings of a powerful human–animal bond that changed how people lived and interacted with the natural world."

Were different Palaeolithic cultures interacting?

Archaeologists have identified several distant human cultures that were living in West Eurasia during the Late Upper Palaeolithic period that over time shifted and changed. These groups are distinguished through differences in artefacts, stone tools and behaviour.

Around 19,000 years ago, a culture known as the Magdalenian spread across western Europe. It moved from southern France to Germany, Belgium and the UK in the north, and going as far east as Poland.

A few thousand years later, another culture known as the Epigravettian expanded, spreading from Italy across eastern and central Europe. It moved westwards and eventually replaced the Magdalenian culture in northern Europe.

Three of the domestic dogs identified in the study were associated with this Epigravettian culture.

But the dog remains at Gough’s Cave date to around 500 years before evidence of this culture appeared in the UK. Instead, the fossils are found alongside artefacts and stone tools linked to the earlier Magdalenian culture.

Not only that, but the fossils from Türkiye are associated with a third group, known as the Anatolian hunter-gatherers.

The researchers suggest there may have been interactions between these different cultures, and that the dogs may have spread alongside the movement of Epigravettian populations.

“We have some evidence that humans from these three distinct cultures were interbreeding and there are changes in stone-tool technologies in northern Europe around the time these dogs lived,” says William. “However, until now, the Magdalenian and Epigravettian cultures have been viewed as fairly separate.”

“The new data represent the strongest evidence yet of resource sharing and interaction between these populations. It suggests some of our previous assumptions may be incorrect.”

“Perhaps these human groups were interacting with one another far more than we previously imagined.”