DOCSLIB.ORG

The Spatial Organization of Bone Crafting During the Middle and Late Mesolithic at Ringsjöholm and Strandvägen in Sweden

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Spatial Organization of Bone Crafting During the Middle and Late Mesolithic at Ringsjöholm and Strandvägen in Sweden Journal of Field Archaeology ISSN: 0093-4690 (Print) 2042-4582 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/yjfa20 The Spatial Organization of Bone Crafting During the Middle and Late Mesolithic at Ringsjöholm and Strandvägen in Sweden Sara Gummesson, Fredrik Molin & Arne Sjöström To cite this article: Sara Gummesson, Fredrik Molin & Arne Sjöström (2019) The Spatial Organization of Bone Crafting During the Middle and Late Mesolithic at Ringsjöholm and Strandvägen in Sweden, Journal of Field Archaeology, 44:3, 165-179, DOI: 10.1080/00934690.2019.1580093 To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/00934690.2019.1580093 © 2019 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group View supplementary material Published online: 01 Mar 2019. Submit your article to this journal Article views: 252 View Crossmark data Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=yjfa20 JOURNAL OF FIELD ARCHAEOLOGY 2019, VOL. 44, NO. 3, 165–179 https://doi.org/10.1080/00934690.2019.1580093 The Spatial Organization of Bone Crafting During the Middle and Late Mesolithic at Ringsjöholm and Strandvägen in Sweden Sara Gummessona, Fredrik Molinb, and Arne Sjöströmc aUppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden; bNational Historical Museums, Linköping, Sweden; cLund University, Lund, Sweden ABSTRACT KEYWORDS This paper focuses on the spatial distribution of bone tool production waste from two Mesolithic sites bone tool production; spatial in Sweden, Ringsjöholm and Strandvägen, with well-preserved faunal remains including bone and distribution; Mesolithic antler artifacts. Local production on both sites has generated a variety of identifiable waste period; taphonomy products deriving from complete chains of production, including unmodified bones, debitage and finished products. Identified categories include: blanks, removed epiphyses, bone flakes, and preforms. Identification of species shows that antler and bone from red deer were the preferred raw materials. Spatial statistical analyses confirm that different stages of bone tool production were organized within separate areas of the sites and that larger items were discarded in the water along the shorelines. Interestingly, blanks and preforms seem to have been stored under water for future use and demarcated clusters of bone flakes in association with dwellings represent “bone knapping floors” where production was more intense than in other areas. Introduction been reported in Sweden, such as at Norje Sunnansund (Kjäll- One of the more important aspects of animal carcass utiliz- quistetal.2014), Rönneholm (Larsson and Sjöström 2011), ation in the Mesolithic was the use of skeletal elements as Tågerup (Cronberg 2001), and Lassebacken I and II (Persson raw material for bone tool production. Bone and antler 2012). These studies have enhanced our understanding of were obviously important raw material for various kinds of the spatial settlement organization and of human activities tools, hunting implements, or personal ornaments. Such on site. Often these patterns indicate the presence of specific finds appear occasionally on Scandinavian Mesolithic sites, activity areas at these sites (Stapert 1989). Our knowledge of only when the preservation of organic material is favorable. activities related to bone tool production, however, is limited. In recent years information about these finds has increased Poor conditions for preservation of osseous material have (David and Kjällquist 2018; Gummesson and Molin in often limited the spatial studies only to lithics; or, at best, press), but still our knowledge of the spatial organization of when faunal assemblages are analyzed only species distri- this craft is limited. Spatial aspects of craft production can butions are used (Olson et al. 2011; Kjällquist et al. 2014). provide further insights as they may highlight important An important exception is the bone tool fabrication floor at aspects of craft organization and specialization (Costin 1991). Kasteelberg B, South Africa (Smith and Poggenpoel 1988). Production is often modeled through technological organ- Spatial patterns in osteoarchaeology also have an obvious ization (Nelson 1991)orchaîne opératoire (e.g., Geneste link to taphonomy, where the spatial dimension of deposi- [1991]). Such perspectives may vary in their overarching tional patterns is of interest (Gummesson, Molin, et al. theoretical positions (Perlès 1993), but they both focus on 2017). Many variables, such as the level of fragmentation or and emphasize modeling of the technological process as burning, affect the possibility of identifying different traces different sequences, including steps such as raw material and marks on the bones. Also, post-depositional processes acquisition, processing, use, and discard. Furthermore, var- affect the osseous material through weathering and degra- ious alternatives that might have influenced or determined dation (Gummesson, Molin, et al. 2017). All of this affects the practices are considered. Conneller (2006) has illustrated comparisons of observed quantitative patterns. the chaîne opératoire in relation to both time and the land- This paper presents the results of spatial studies of bone scape, where places and agencies are linked in spatial net- tool production waste from two Mesolithic sites in Sweden, works that actually produce the landscape (also see Ingold both with well-preserved osteological remains. The two [1993] on taskscapes). sites, Ringsjöholm and Strandvägen, are dated to the Middle Spatial dimensions in prehistoric settings may be studied in and Late Mesolithic, with Ringsjöholm in Scania representing terms of many different aspects and scales. Grøn (2003)has an older chronological sequence than Strandvägen in Öster- shown the importance of the spatial organization of dwell- götland. Favorable preservation conditions at both sites ing-spaces among recent hunter-gatherers and how it seems have led to the recovery of bone artifacts otherwise often rooted in the social psychology of smaller groups. Spatial dis- not represented in the archaeological record. Earlier studies tribution patterns for lithics on Stone Age sites have commonly on Mesolithic bone tool production, technology and CONTACT Sara Gummesson sara.gummesson@ofl.su.se Lilla Frescativägen 7, 114 18 Stockholm, Sweden Supplemental data for this article can be accessed at https://doi.org/10.1080/00934690.2019.1580093 © 2019 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, and is not altered, transformed, or built upon in any way. 166 S. GUMMESSON ET AL. operational chains, principally by Eva David (1999, 2007; Strandvägen David et al. 2015), have been used as a point of departure During the last decade, an important Mesolithic site com- for the present study. At both sites bone tool production plex in Motala, in Eastern Central Sweden, has seen large- has generated identifiable blanks, preforms, discarded waste, scale archaeological excavations (FIGURE 1). This work has and debitage. The finds actually constitute a large part of revealed three more or less contemporaneous sites from the two faunal assemblages; they represent chains of pro- the Late Mesolithic in close spatial relation to each other duction—from unmodified bones to debitage, finished, and and to the River Motala Ström. The river connects Lake Vät- reworked objects—from the local production of bone tools. ternwiththeBalticSeabasin,whichatthattimewassitu- The excavated areas of the two sites, although markedly ated approximately 30 km to the east. On the north side of different in size, both include dry occupation layers and sub- the river, two sites have been excavated: Kanaljorden, a merged sediments in water. Both sites exhibit settlement deposition of human and animal remains in a small lake remains with dwellings and different archaeological features. (Hallgren and Fornander 2016); and Verkstadsvägen, a The archaeological remains at Ringsjöholm provide an site on the river bank with several dwellings (Hagberg and important example of the use of a rather limited space in Westermark 2015). On the opposite river bank, on the the landscape, on a longshore bar in Lake Ringsjön. Strandvä- south side of the river, is the site Strandvägen. This settle- gen on the other hand is a large settlement with several con- ment was excavated during the years 1999–2003 and temporary occupational units on the shore of the River 2010–2013, with the site comprising extensive refuse layers Motala Ström. It was anticipated that differences in pro- along the river shore, several dwellings, knapping floors, and duction and/or settlement organization may be visible in activity areas, as well as a Mesolithic cemetery (Carlsson the spatial distribution patterns of finds that are related to 2008;Molinetal.2014; Gummesson and Molin 2016). bone craft but also that these patterns would provide Thesiteisdatedto6000–4500 CAL B.C. with the most inten- additional previously unknown information on site use and sive period of settlement at around 5500–5000 CAL B.C.An craft organization. area of 7110 m2 has been investigated, of which 3145 m2 of occupational and refuse layers
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Possibilities of Osteology in Historical Sarni Archaeology Th Life and Livelihood at the 18 -Century Ohcejohka Sarni Market Site
    The possibilities of osteology in historical Sarni archaeology th Life and livelihood at the 18 -century Ohcejohka Sarni market site Eeva-Kristiina Harlin Giellagas Institute, Porotie 12, Fl- 99950 Karigasniemi, Finland Abstract The Ohcejohka market site This paper presents the archaeological material The Ohcejohka market site is well known from from a historical Sarni market site in Ohcejohka. written sources. In the past, it was the central The site was in use already in 1640 when annual place for the Ohcejohka siida (Lapp village), markets were held in the area, and the Ohcejoh- and annual markets were held there at the end ka church was erected at the site in 1701. The of February already in 1640. Due to the colonial excavated material derives from two traditional policy of the Swedish crown, the Ohcejohka and Sarni huts, goahti. The find material is quite typi- Guovdageaidnu churches were erected in 1701, cal for l ?1"- l 9th-century Sarni sites, and the main and even today the new Ohcejohka church, find group consists of unburned animal bones. erected between 1850 and 1853, is situated near The animal bones are analysed and questions of the site (ltkonen 1948 I: 206- 208, 303; 1948 II: livelihood are discussed. 59, 203). Additionally, there is an old sacristy and cemetery at the site and a historical road Keywords: to the Norwegian coast passes through the area Sarni studies, osteology, ethnoarchaeology, his- (Karjalainen 2003). torical archaeology, reindeer. During the winter markets, both live reindeer and reindeer products were sold by the Sarni and traded with burghers coming from southern Introduction towns.
    [Show full text]
  • Using the Bone Tool
    Chapter 18 Using the Bone Tool The BONE TOOL allows you to set hinges either within an object or between a group of objects. It can be applied to create human movements in arms and legs, robotic arm movements, crane operations, etc. The Bone Tool Basics To illustrate the basics of the BONE TOOL, a simple shape will be converted into an arm. A Drawing the Shape 1 Load Adobe Animate or close the current files and start a FULL HD preset file. © Guided Computer Tutorials 2021 18-1 Learning Adobe Animate CC B Applying the Bone Tool 1 Press CTRL+ or COMMAND+ to zoom the view to 200%. 3 When you release the mouse button the first bone is created. NOTE: This first section will represent a bone from the shoulder to the elbow. 5 Release the mouse button to create the second bone. NOTE: This second section will represent a bone from the elbow to the wrist. 18-2 © Guided Computer Tutorials 2021 Using the Bone Tool 18 NOTE: All the bone sections are moved into the ARMATURE layer. C Using the Bone Links The bone sections have set a rotation joint at the left of the shape (red diamond shape) and hinges (or joints) at the centre and near the right of the shape. 1 Press CTRL- or COMMAND- to return the view to 100%. NOTE: When the mouse pointer is over a joint or bone that can be moved, a bone symbol is added to the pointer. © Guided Computer Tutorials 2021 18-3 Learning Adobe Animate CC D The Pin Option The PIN option allows you to fix the position of a bone and prevent it from moving.
    [Show full text]
  • Adobe Animate Cc Classroom in a Book (2018 Release) 301
    NATURAL AND CHARACTER 9 ANIMATION Lesson Overview In this lesson, you’ll learn how to do the following: • Use the Bone tool to build armatures (skeletons) of movie clips • Use the Bone tool to build armatures of shapes • Animate natural motion of armatures using inverse kinematics • Constrain and pin the armature joints • Edit the position of armature bones and joints • Refine shape deformations with the Bind tool • Simulate physics with the Spring feature • Adjust the speed setting to add a sense of weight to armatures This lesson will take about one and a half hours to complete. Please log in to your account on peachpit.com to download the lesson files for this chap- ter, or go to the Getting Started section at the beginning of this book and follow the instructions under “Accessing the Lesson Files and Web Edition.” 298 From the Library of Alvaro Alvarez You can easily create complex and natural motion with articulations—joints between linked objects and within shapes—by using the Bone tool for animation in a process called inverse kinematics . 299 From the Library of Alvaro Alvarez Getting Started You’ll start the lesson by viewing the animated walking monkey that you’ll create as you learn about natural motion in Adobe Animate CC. 1 Double-click the 09End.html file in the Lesson09/09End folder to play the animation. The animation depicts a cartoon monkey walking in an endless cycle with a scrolling motion in the background. His arms and legs swing naturally, and his tail curls and unfurls naturally and smoothly.
    [Show full text]
  • Bioarchaeology (Anthropological Archaeology) - Mario ŠLAUS
    PHYSICAL (BIOLOGICAL) ANTHROPOLOGY - Bioarchaeology (Anthropological Archaeology) - Mario ŠLAUS BIOARCHAEOLOGY (ANTHROPOLOGICAL ARCHAEOLOGY) Mario ŠLAUS Department of Archaeology, Croatian Academy of Sciences and Arts, Zagreb, Croatia. Keywords: Bioarchaeology, archaeological, forensic, antemortem, post-mortem, perimortem, traumas, Cribra orbitalia, Harris lines, Tuberculosis, Leprosy, Treponematosis, Trauma analysis, Accidental trauma, Intentional trauma, Osteological, Degenerative disease, Habitual activities, Osteoarthritis, Schmorl’s nodes, Tooth wear Contents 1. Introduction 1.1. Definition of Bioarchaeology 1.2. History of Bioarchaeology 2. Analysis of Skeletal Remains 2.1. Excavation and Recovery 2.2. Human / Non-Human Remains 2.3. Archaeological / Forensic Remains 2.4. Differentiating between Antemortem/Postmortem/Perimortem Traumas 2.5. Determination of Sex 2.6. Determination of Age at Death 2.6.1. Age Determination in Subadults 2.6.2. Age Determination in Adults. 3. Skeletal and dental markers of stress 3.1. Linear Enamel Hypoplasia 3.2. Cribra Orbitalia 3.3. Harris Lines 4. Analyses of dental remains 4.1. Caries 4.2. Alveolar Bone Disease and Antemortem Tooth Loss 5. Infectious disease 5.1. Non–specific Infectious Diseases 5.2. Specific Infectious Disease 5.2.1. Tuberculosis 5.2.2. Leprosy 5.2.3. TreponematosisUNESCO – EOLSS 6. Trauma analysis 6.1. Accidental SAMPLETrauma CHAPTERS 6.2. Intentional Trauma 7. Osteological and dental evidence of degenerative disease and habitual activities 7.1. Osteoarthritis 7.2. Schmorl’s Nodes 7.3. Tooth Wear Caused by Habitual Activities 8. Conclusion Glossary Bibliography Biographical Sketch ©Encyclopedia of Life Support Systems (EOLSS) PHYSICAL (BIOLOGICAL) ANTHROPOLOGY - Bioarchaeology (Anthropological Archaeology) - Mario ŠLAUS 1. Introduction 1.1. Definition of Bioarchaeology Bioarchaeology is the study of human biological remains within their cultural (archaeological) context.
    [Show full text]
  • Early Evidence of Stone Tool Use in Bone Working Activities at Qesem Cave, Israel
    www.nature.com/scientificreports OPEN Early evidence of stone tool use in bone working activities at Qesem Cave, Israel Received: 15 July 2016 Andrea Zupancich1, Stella Nunziante-Cesaro2, Ruth Blasco1,3, Jordi Rosell4,5, Accepted: 03 October 2016 Emanuela Cristiani6, Flavia Venditti7, Cristina Lemorini7, Ran Barkai1 & Avi Gopher1 Published: 25 November 2016 For a long while, the controversy surrounding several bone tools coming from pre-Upper Palaeolithic contexts favoured the view of Homo sapiens as the only species of the genus Homo capable of modifying animal bones into specialised tools. However, evidence such as South African Early Stone Age modified bones, European Lower Palaeolithic flaked bone tools, along with Middle and Late Pleistocene bone retouchers, led to a re-evaluation of the conception of Homo sapiens as the exclusive manufacturer of specialised bone tools. The evidence presented herein include use wear and bone residues identified on two flint scrapers as well as a sawing mark on a fallow deer tibia, not associated with butchering activities. Dated to more than 300 kya, the evidence here presented is among the earliest related to tool-assisted bone working intended for non-dietary purposes, and contributes to the debate over the recognition of bone working as a much older behaviour than previously thought. The results of this study come from the application of a combined methodological approach, comprising use wear analysis, residue analysis, and taphonomy. This approach allowed for the retrieval of both direct and indirect evidence of tool-assisted bone working, at the Lower Palaeolithic site of Qesem Cave (Israel). Homo sapiens’ supposedly exclusive manufacture of specialised tools made from modified animal bones, along with other aspects such as art and specialised hunting weapons, has led to the definition of a clear behavioural and cognitive boundary between H.
    [Show full text]
  • Mesolithic Bone Tools of South-West Europe : the Example of the French Site of Le Cuzoul De Gramat Benjamin Marquebielle
    Mesolithic bone tools of South-West Europe : the example of the French site of le Cuzoul de Gramat Benjamin Marquebielle To cite this version: Benjamin Marquebielle. Mesolithic bone tools of South-West Europe : the example of the French site of le Cuzoul de Gramat. 7th Meeting of the Worked Bone Research Group, Sep 2009, Wroclaw, Poland. hal-01990262 HAL Id: hal-01990262 https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01990262 Submitted on 11 Feb 2019 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. Written in Bones Studies on technological and social contexts of past faunal skeletal remains edited by Justyna Baron Bernadeta Kufel-Diakowska Uniwersytet Wrocławski Instytut Archeologii Wrocław 2011 InstItute of ArchAeology, unIversIty of Wrocław, 2011 Editors Justyna Baron and Bernadeta Kufel-Diakowska Reviewers Arkadiusz Marciniak, Jarosław Wilczyński Layout Janusz M. szafran, Jarosław Michalak Cover Justyna Baron © Institute of Archaeology, university of Wrocław and individual authors 2011 IsBn 978-83-61416-64-7 Wrocławska Drukarnia naukowa PAN im. stanisława Kulczyńskiego sp. z o.o. 53-505 Wrocław, ul. lelewela 4 Contents Preface . 5 Methods and methodology steven P. Ashby The Language of the Combmaker: interpreting complexity in Viking-Age Industry .
    [Show full text]
  • Carpals and Tarsals of Mule Deer, Black Bear and Human: an Osteology Guide for the Archaeologist
    Western Washington University Western CEDAR WWU Graduate School Collection WWU Graduate and Undergraduate Scholarship 2009 Carpals and tarsals of mule deer, black bear and human: an osteology guide for the archaeologist Tamela S. Smart Western Washington University Follow this and additional works at: https://cedar.wwu.edu/wwuet Part of the Anthropology Commons Recommended Citation Smart, Tamela S., "Carpals and tarsals of mule deer, black bear and human: an osteology guide for the archaeologist" (2009). WWU Graduate School Collection. 19. https://cedar.wwu.edu/wwuet/19 This Masters Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the WWU Graduate and Undergraduate Scholarship at Western CEDAR. It has been accepted for inclusion in WWU Graduate School Collection by an authorized administrator of Western CEDAR. For more information, please contact [email protected]. MASTER'S THESIS In presenting this thesis in partial fulfillment of the requirements for a master's degree at Western Washington University, I grant to Western Washington University the non-exclusive royalty-free right to archive, reproduce, distribute, and display the thesis in any and all forms, including electronic format, via any digital library mechanisms maintained by WWu. I represent and warrant this is my original work, and does not infringe or violate any rights of others. I warrant that I have obtained written permissions from the owner of any third party copyrighted material included in these files. I acknowledge that I retain ownership rights to the copyright of this work, including but not limited to the right to use all or part of this work in future works, such as articles or books.
    [Show full text]
  • Subdisciplines of Anthropology: a Modular Approach
    DOCUMENT RESUME ED 260 774 JC 850 487 AUTHOR Kassebaum, Peter TITLE Subdisciplines of Anthropology: A Modular Approach. Cultural Anthropology. INSTITUTION College of Marin, Kentfield, Calif. PUB DATE ) [84] NOTE 19p. PUB TYPE Guides - Classroom Use- Materials (For Learner) (051) EDRS PRICE ,MF01/PC01 Plus Postage. DESCRIPTORS *Anthropology; Community Colleges; *Intellectual Disciplines; Learning Modules; TwoYear Colleges IDENTIFIERS *Cultural Anthropology ABSTRACT Designed for mse as supplementary instructional material in 4 cultural anthropologycourse; this learning module introduces the idea that anthropology iscomposed of a number of subdisciplines and that cultural amthropologyhas numerous subfields which are thg specialtyareas for many practicing anthropologists. Beginning with a general discussion ofthe field of anthropology, the paper next describes, defines, and discusses theoreticaland historical considerations, for the followingsubdisciplines within anthropology:. (1) archaeology; (2) physicalanthropology; (3) medical anthropology; (4) cultural anthropology; (5)ethnology; (6) =mathematical anthropology; (7),economicanthropology; (8) political anthropology; (9) the ethnography of law; (10)anthropology and education; (11) linguistics; (12) folklore; (13)ethnomusicology; (14) art and anthropology; (15) *nthropologyand belief systems; (16) culture and perionality; (17)-appliedanthropology; (18) urban anthropology; and,(1,9) economic anthropology.A test for students is included. (LAL) %N. ***************************************w*******************************
    [Show full text]
  • Human Osteology ANT 3331-01/02/03 Spring, 2008 ANT 3331-01, Tuesday/Thursday, 9:30-10:50, 224 Marrs Mclean Science Bldg
    Human Osteology ANT 3331-01/02/03 Spring, 2008 ANT 3331-01, Tuesday/Thursday, 9:30-10:50, 224 Marrs McLean Science Bldg. ANT 3331-02, Tuesday/Thursday, 11:00-12:20, 224 Marrs McLean Science Bldg. ANT 3331-03, Tuesday/Thursday, 12:30-1:50, 224 Marrs McLean Science Bldg. Instructor: Dr. Joseph Ferraro Office: 308.2 Marrs McLean Science Bldg. Phone: 710-1401 Email: [email protected] Office hours: Tuesday 3:00-5:00 in my office and/or in the lab, or by appointment. You can also reach me via phone and email. Remember, I’m here to help you learn: take advantage of me as a resource (within reason). Open lab hours: to be announced in class and posted on ‘Blackboard’ Texts: Required: Human Osteology. 2nd Ed. Tim D. White. Academic Press: New York. Strongly suggested: The Elements of Style. 4th Ed. William Strunk and E.B. White. Longman: Massachusetts (available almost everywhere, including the Baylor Bookstore). Course Overview: This class is designed to introduce you to the structure, design, and variability of the modern human skeleton. Much as the bony skeleton offers a framework for the rest of the body, so too will this course will provide a foundation for future studies in areas such as forensic sciences, physical anthropology, archaeology, and most aspects of medicine. For each element of the skeleton we will examine issues of structure, function, development, and evolutionary history. Lectures will also emphasize aspects of bone histology and biology, excavation and preservation, taphonomy, pathology, and the estimation of age and stature.
    [Show full text]
  • Animacy, Symbolism, and Feathers from Mantle's Cave, Colorado By
    Animacy, Symbolism, and Feathers from Mantle's Cave, Colorado By Caitlin Ariel Sommer B.A., Connecticut College 2006 A thesis submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School of the University of Colorado in partial fulfillment of the requirement for the degree of Master of Arts Department of Anthropology 2013 This thesis entitled: Animacy, Symbolism, and Feathers from Mantle’s Cave, Colorado Written by Caitlin Ariel Sommer Has been approved for the Department of Anthropology Dr. Stephen H. Lekson Dr. Catherine M. Cameron Sheila Rae Goff, NAGPRA Liaison, History Colorado Date__________ The final copy of this thesis has been examined by the signatories, and we Find that both the content and the form meet acceptable presentation standards Of scholarly work in the above mentioned discipline. Abstract Sommer, Caitlin Ariel, M.A. (Anthropology Department) Title: Animacy, Symbolism, and Feathers from Mantle’s Cave, Colorado Thesis directed by Dr. Stephen H. Lekson Rediscovered in the 1930s by the Mantle family, Mantle’s Cave contained excellently preserved feather bundles, a feather headdress, moccasins, a deer-scalp headdress, baskets, stone tools, and other perishable goods. From the start of excavations, Mantle’s Cave appeared to display influences from both Fremont and Ancestral Puebloan peoples, leading Burgh and Scoggin to determine that the cave was used by Fremont people displaying traits heavily influenced by Basketmaker peoples. Researchers have analyzed the baskets, cordage, and feather headdress in the hopes of obtaining both radiocarbon dates and clues as to which culture group used Mantle’s Cave. This thesis attempts to derive the cultural influence of the artifacts from Mantle’s Cave by analyzing the feathers.
    [Show full text]
  • Teaching Bones from My Garden
    Journal of Archaeology and Education Volume 2 Issue 1 Article 1 January 2018 Teaching Bones from my Garden John C. Whittaker Grinnell College, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.library.umaine.edu/jae Part of the Archaeological Anthropology Commons Recommended Citation Whittaker, John C. 2018 Teaching Bones from my Garden. Journal of Archaeology and Education 2 Available at: https://digitalcommons.library.umaine.edu/jae/vol2/iss1/1 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by DigitalCommons@UMaine. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of Archaeology and Education by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@UMaine. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Whittaker: Teaching Bones from my Garden Abstract Faunal analysis, or zooarchaeology, is an important subfield that provides information on human ecology, economy, culture, and society. Few of my students have much experience with hunting, farming, anatomy, or even eating meat these days, so faunal analysis labs in an Archaeological Field Methods class present some difficulties. Faunal assemblages from archaeological sites are often small, fragile, and too valuable for class use. They require good comparative collections, and it may be difficult for students to relate to unfamiliar animals and cultures. These problems can be overcome by producing a faunal teaching assemblage from home meat consumption. For over 20 years I have composted all organics from my kitchen, and subsequently collected bone from my garden. A useful assemblage can be created in a much shorter time if the bones are prepared by maceration instead of composting.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix-A-Osteology-V-2.0.Pdf
    EXPLORATIONS: AN OPEN INVITATION TO BIOLOGICAL ANTHROPOLOGY Editors: Beth Shook, Katie Nelson, Kelsie Aguilera and Lara Braff American Anthropological Association Arlington, VA 2019 Explorations: An Open Invitation to Biological Anthropology is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License, except where otherwise noted. ISBN – 978-1-931303-63-7 www.explorations.americananthro.org Appendix A. Osteology Jason M. Organ, Ph.D., Indiana University School of Medicine Jessica N. Byram, Ph.D., Indiana University School of Medicine Learning Objectives • Identify anatomical position and anatomical planes, and use directional terms to describe relative positions of bones • Describe the gross structure and microstructure of bone as it relates to bone function • Describe types of bone formation and remodeling, and identify (by name) all of the bones of the human skeleton • Distinguish major bony features of the human skeleton like muscle attachment sites and passages for nerves and/or arteries and veins • Identify the bony features relevant to estimating age, sex, and ancestry in forensic and bioarchaeological contexts • Compare human and chimpanzee skeletal anatomy Anthropology is the study of people, and the skeleton is the framework of the person. So while all subdisciplines of anthropology study human behavior (culture, language, etc.) either presently or in the past, biological anthropology is the only subdiscipline that studies the human body specifically. And the fundamental core of the human (or any vertebrate) body is the skeleton. Osteology, or the study of bones, is central to biological anthropology because a solid foundation in osteology makes it possible to understand all sorts of aspects of how people have lived and evolved.
    [Show full text]