DOCSLIB.ORG

Ontario Archaeology

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Ontario Archaeology 2014 Ontario Archaeology Journal of The Ontario Archaeological Society Articles The Archaeological History of the Wendat to A.D. 1651: An Overview Ontario Archaeology Ronald F.Williamson The Bioarchaeology of Cannibalism at the Charity Site Michael W. Spence and Lawrence Jackson The Gosling Site (AiHb-189): A Small, Parkhill Phase, Paleo-Indian Site in Guelph, Ontario Christopher Ellis and Dana R. Poulton From Grey to Print Introduction Ron Williamson Preliminary Excavations at Sainte Marie II Peter J. Carruthers No. 94 Number 94, 2014 Williamson Archaeological History of the Wendat 3 The Archaeological History of the Wendat to A.D. 1651: An Overview Ronald F. Williamson The foundations for modern scholarship concerning Wendat history and archaeology were laid in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries by researchers, such as Andrew Hunter and Arthur Jones, investigating hundreds of sites and ossuaries that had been reported to provincial authorities. The focus of their work and of the work of many of those who followed was the search for places that could be related to villages and missions mentioned in early documentary accounts. Avocational, academic, and government agency archaeologists working in the mid-twentieth century had only these early archaeological studies to inform their investigations of Wendat sites. During the past 30 years, however, a revolution in archaeological data collection has occurred. Some of these data are published and thus accessible to current researchers, but much of it remains unpublished and some of it has not even been reported on. This paper is an overview of most of this work, especially of those sites where substantial excavations have occurred. It is intended to provide a guide for those who wish to use these studies to delve deeper into various aspects of the history of historic-period or ancestral Wendat communities. Introduction This paper is intended to provide an up-to-date been occupied for thousands of years by proto- summary of archaeological research on Wendat Algonquian speakers and their ancestors (see sites in Ontario to A.D. 1651. It relies on Iroquoian Origins below). Once Iroquoian- archaeological evidence for the period prior to speaking peoples appeared, some local populations contact with Europeans and on both the adopted their language and aspects of their ways of archaeological and documentary records for the life. There is now agreement that the full subsequent years. The Wendat are Iroquoian, a expression of Iroquoian culture—the essential term that refers to both a cultural pattern and a elements of which were a primary reliance on linguistic family, the latter of which includes the horticulture for subsistence; habitation in often- languages spoken by the Northern Iroquoians of fortified villages containing bark-covered the Great Lakes region as well as Cherokee, spoken longhouses shared usually by matrilineally related in the southern Appalachians, and Tuscarora, extended families; clan membership extending spoken near the mid-Atlantic coast. The term beyond each village to other communities, thereby Iroquoian, therefore, should not be confused with integrating villages within tribes and “Iroquois,” a word adopted by Europeans to refer confederacies; a set of shared governance structures to the Haudenosaunee, or Five Nations and religious beliefs and practices; and Confederacy (see also Williamson and participation in ritualized warfare, trophy taking, MacDonald 2015:103-104). and prisoner sacrifice (Trigger 1976:91-104)—is While the exact timing and catalyst for the not recognizable archaeologically until the turn of introduction of Iroquoian speakers into the Great the fourteenth century (e.g., Engelbrecht 2003; Lakes region are unknown, the region had clearly Warrick 2000, 2008). 4 Ontario Archaeology No. 94, 2014 The Huron, or Wendat, were the are reflected in their language and material culture, northernmost of the Iroquoians, who, in the as well as their clan organization, kinship terms, seventeenth century, inhabited the area between and mortuary practices. The Susquehannock (also Lake Simcoe and Georgian Bay known historically Andastoerhonon) were another Iroquoian as Wendake (Figure 1). Their confederacy population, situated southeast of the Iroquois in consisted of four allied nations: the Attignawantan central and eastern Pennsylvania and northern (Bear), Attigneenongnahac (Cord), Arendarhonon Maryland. (Rock), and Tahontaenrat (Deer). Another There were also Iroquoian-speaking population, known as the Ataronchronon (Bog), communities living in the St. Lawrence valley west does not appear to have been an independent of Quebec City in the sixteenth century. member of the confederacy and was instead a Encountered by Jacques Cartier in his 1534 and division of the Attignawantan (Trigger 1976:30). 1535 visits to eastern Canada, they had moved Their name for themselves, Wendat, has been elsewhere by the time of Samuel de Champlain’s interpreted as meaning “islanders” or “dwellers on visit of 1603. Although their absence 70 years later a peninsula” (Heidenreich 1971:300-301; Trigger was at one time considered a mystery, we now 1969:9) and may only have come into common know that relocations of that nature were a long- use to refer to the Wendat confederacy in the standing option for Iroquoian decision makers seventeenth century (Steckley 2007:25; Thwaites when faced with newly emerging social and 1896-1901, 5:278). political challenges. The Tionontaté lived immediately southwest The Algonquian-speaking neighbours of the of the Wendat. Their confederacy included two Wendat included the Odawa, who lived in the separate groups, the Wolf and Deer (Thwaites Bruce Peninsula area, next to the Tionontaté, and 1896-1901, 33:143, 20:43). At the time the beyond; the Nipissing, who lived near the lake of Jesuits arrived in Huronia, the Wendat-Tionontaté the same name; and a number of small bands on were allied against common Iroquois enemies, the eastern and northern shores of Georgian Bay although this had not always been the case. Their and along the Ottawa River. combined population prior to the spread of These groups defined the geopolitical European epidemics in the 1630s has been landscape of the lower Great Lakes at the time of estimated to have been 30,000 (Warrick sustained European contact. From A.D. 1300 to 2008:204). 1600, however, many of the ancestral Their more distant Iroquoian-speaking communities of the Wendat were situated not only neighbours included the Neutral Confederacy in their historic territory but also along the rivers (Attiwandaron), who lived farther south, on the that drain into the north shore of Lake Ontario peninsula separating Lakes Erie and Ontario and between the Credit River and Prince Edward extending west and, for a brief period, east of the County (Figure 1). These communities eventually Niagara River; the Erie, who inhabited the merged with others in historic Wendake and territory south of Lake Erie; the Wenro Tionontaté country, after which it was only a few (Oneronon), another group living south of the decades until the consequences of European Great Lakes and associated with the Neutral; and presence altered Indigenous lives forever. Epidemic the Iroquois Confederacy (Haudenosaunee), who diseases and famine reduced their populations by lived in clustered tribal groupings across what is more than 50 percent between 1634 and 1640 now central New York State. The Haudenosaunee (Warrick 2008:222-236). Eventually, by the mid- included (from west to east) the Seneca, Cayuga, seventeenth century, traditional conflicts between Onondaga, Oneida, and Mohawk, all of whom the Wendat-Tionontaté, Attiwandaron, and had unique cultural traits and histories owing to Haudenosaunee, exacerbated by European their geographic separation and development in agendas, resulted in the dispersal of the three distinct tribal territories, which they continued to Ontario confederacies and some of their occupy into the contact period. These differences Algonquian-speaking allies. Williamson Archaeological History of the Wendat 5 Figure 1. Locations of Northern Iroquoian groups. Scholars of this period are fortunate to have among the Iroquois from 1654 to 1667 (Thwaites available to them the rich seventeenth-century 1896–1901) are filled with descriptions of Wendat documentary record of the lives of Northern life and society. All three sources must be Iroquoians. The three principal sources are employed with caution, however, as they were Champlain, Sagard, and the Jesuits. The works of written by outsiders with their own agendas Samuel de Champlain, an experienced soldier and (Trigger 1976). explorer, recorded his observations of Wendat (and These primary historical sources, as well as Tionontaté) life (in particular, on clothing, other informative accounts, were synthesized by settlements, military aspects, and hunting tactics) Elizabeth Tooker (1964) to provide a thorough and their economy and interpersonal relations source for ethnographic references to most aspects during a winter spent among them in 1615–16 of Wendat life between 1615 and 1649. A major (Biggar 1922-1936). The detailed account of secondary summary of the lives of Wendat peoples Gabriel Sagard, a Récollet friar who spent the can be found in Trigger’s The Children of winter of 1623–24 with the Wendat (Sagard Aataentsic (1976), which masterfully combines 1939), can be considered one of the world’s first history, ethnography, and archaeology to give substantial ethnographies
Load more

Recommended publications
  • From Amphipolis to Mosul, New Approaches to Cultural Heritage Preservation in the Eastern Mediterranean
    THE FUTURE OF THE PAST: From Amphipolis to Mosul, New Approaches to Cultural Heritage Preservation in the Eastern Mediterranean Editors Konstantinos Chalikias, Maggie Beeler, Ariel Pearce, and Steve Renette http://futureofthepast.wix.com/culturalheritage HERITAGE, CONSERVATION & ARCHAEOLOGY ARCHAEOLOGICAL INSTITUTE OF AMERICA Contents 1. The Future of the Past: From Amphipolis to Mosul, New Approaches to Cultural Heritage Preservation in the Eastern Mediterranean .......................................................................................................................................................................................... 3 Konstantinos Chalikias, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Maggie Beeler, Bryn Mawr College, Ariel Pearce, Temple University, and Steve Renette, University of Pennsylvania 2. Go, Do Good! Responsibility and the Future of Cultural Heritage in the Eastern Mediterranean in the 21st Century ........... 5 Morag M. Kersel, DePaul University 3. Contested Antiquities, Contested Histories: The City of David as an Example ........................................................................... 11 Rannfrid I. Thelle, Wichita State University 4. Cultural Racketeering in Egypt—Predicting Patterns in Illicit Activity: Quantitative Tools of the 21st-Century Archaeologist .......................................................................................................................................................................................... 21 Katie A. Paul, The Antiquities Coalition
    [Show full text]
  • ANTY 513.01: Seminar in Bioarchaeology and Skeletal Biology
    University of Montana ScholarWorks at University of Montana Syllabi Course Syllabi Spring 1-2016 ANTY 513.01: Seminar in Bioarchaeology and Skeletal Biology Corey Ragsdale University of Montana, Missoula Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.umt.edu/syllabi Let us know how access to this document benefits ou.y Recommended Citation Ragsdale, Corey, "ANTY 513.01: Seminar in Bioarchaeology and Skeletal Biology" (2016). Syllabi. 4657. https://scholarworks.umt.edu/syllabi/4657 This Syllabus is brought to you for free and open access by the Course Syllabi at ScholarWorks at University of Montana. It has been accepted for inclusion in Syllabi by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks at University of Montana. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Anthropology 513 Bioarchaeology Seminar Instructor: Dr. Corey Ragsdale Office: Social Science 217 Email: [email protected] Office hours: TR 2:00 to 3:30 Course Description Bioarchaeology allows us to ‘people’ the past. To do this, bioarchaeologists follow two general rules of thumb. First, they contextualize human remains in physical space, cultural milieu, and pre-historic time. That is, skeletonized and mummified bodies are never examined without also considering their associated archaeological materials. Second, bioarchaeologists regard ancient bodies as bio-cultural phenomena. Human biology is impacted directly by culture, and vice versa. With these two ideas in hand, we will explore bioarchaeology’s history, development, major topical concerns, and debates. We will also engage critically with categories and assumptions about race, sex/gender, age, ethnicity, disease and disability, violence, and body parts. To conclude the semester, we will reflect upon bioarchaeology’s relevance in contemporary politics.
    [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]
  • Issue Information
    Juengst and Becker, Editors Editors and Becker, Juengst of Community The Bioarchaeology 28 AP3A No. The Bioarchaeology of Community Sara L. Juengst and Sara K. Becker, Editors Contributions by Sara K. Becker Deborah Blom Jered B. Cornelison Sylvia Deskaj Lynne Goldstein Sara L. Juengst Ann M. Kakaliouras Wendy Lackey-Cornelison William J. Meyer Anna C. Novotny Molly K. Zuckerman 2017 Archeological Papers of the ISSN 1551-823X American Anthropological Association, Number 28 aapaa_28_1_cover.inddpaa_28_1_cover.indd 1 112/05/172/05/17 22:26:26 PPMM The Bioarchaeology of Community Sara L. Juengst and Sara K. Becker, Editors Contributions by Sara K. Becker Deborah Blom Jered B. Cornelison Sylvia Deskaj Lynne Goldstein Sara L. Juengst Ann M. Kakaliouras Wendy Lackey-Cornelison William J. Meyer Anna C. Novotny Molly K. Zuckerman 2017 Archeological Papers of the American Anthropological Association, Number 28 ARCHEOLOGICAL PAPERS OF THE AMERICAN ANTHROPOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION Lynne Goldstein, General Series Editor Number 28 THE BIOARCHAEOLOGY OF COMMUNITY 2017 Aims and Scope: The Archaeological Papers of the American Anthropological Association (AP3A) is published on behalf of the Archaeological Division of the American Anthropological Association. AP3A publishes original monograph-length manuscripts on a wide range of subjects generally considered to fall within the purview of anthropological archaeology. There are no geographical, temporal, or topical restrictions. Organizers of AAA symposia are particularly encouraged to submit manuscripts, but submissions need not be restricted to these or other collected works. Copyright and Copying (in any format): © 2017 American Anthropological Association. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored or transmitted in any form or by any means without the prior permission in writing from the copyright holder.
    [Show full text]
  • NAPC FORUM 2018 Speaker Bios
    NAPC FORUM 2018 Speaker Bios As Newport Restoration Foundation's Director of Preservation, Shantia Anderheggen manages the organization's portfolio of over 80 historic properties in Newport, RI, as well as the coordinating the organization's ongoing work on its Keeping History Above Water initiative. Prior to NRF, Shantia served as Director of Easements for the National Trust for Historic Preservation, Historic Preservation Planner for the City of Newport (RI), and Historic Preservation Team Leader for Historic New England (formerly the Society for the Preservation of New England Antiquities). She is currently President of the New England Chapter of the Vernacular Architecture Forum and sits on the US ICOMOS Subcommittee for Climate Change & Heritage Knowledge Exchange. Sara André is an architectural historian with the Iowa State Historic Preservation Office. Ms. André has been working professionally in the preservation field since 1999. She has extensive experience with survey work, National Register nomination review, preservation planning, tax credit review, and regulatory review. Ms. André worked with the NJ Historic Preservation Office for 15 years, prior to joining the IA SHPO. Aaron Barlow is a newcomer to the Historic Preservation community. He graduated from the University of Utah in 2016 with a Master’s degree in City and Metropolitan Planning and now works as an Associate Planner for the City of Hutchinson. Aaron assisted in the development of the Historic Preservation Cost Comparison Tool and now uses it regularly to help property owners with their home renovation projects. Rich Barry has been working with Kärcher, a leader in cleaning technology and manufacturer, since May 2015 to advance their worldwide Cultural Sponsoring Program in the United States.
    [Show full text]
  • Bioarchaeology and Social Theory
    Bioarchaeology and Social Theory Series Editor Debra L. Martin Professor of Anthropology University of Nevada Las Vegas , USA More information about this series at http://www.springer.com/series/11976 Lorna Tilley Theory and Practice in the Bioarchaeology of Care Lorna Tilley Australian National University Canberra, Australia Bioarchaeology and Social Theory ISBN 978-3-319-18859-1 ISBN 978-3-319-18860-7 (eBook) DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-18860-7 Library of Congress Control Number: 2015942688 Springer Cham Heidelberg New York Dordrecht London © Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015 This work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifi cally the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfi lms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed. The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specifi c statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, express or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made.
    [Show full text]
  • Ontario) - Census Index 1851 Census - Camden E
    ITEMS IN LIBRARY CASES 150 Years at St. John's, York Mills 1848 and 1850 Canada West (Ontario) - Census Index 1851 Census - Camden E. Township - Addington County 1851 Census of Kingston Township, Frontenac County, Canada West (Ontario) 1861 Census - Fredericksburg Township 1861 Census - Villages of Napanee, Newburgh & Bath - Lennox & Addington County 1861 Census of Hallowell Township - Prince Edward County, Ontario 1891 Ontario Census, Cavan Township, Durham County (MP86) 1891 Ontario Census, Manvers Township, Durham County (MP88) 1891 Ontario Census, Monaghan_North Township, Peterborough County (MP60) 1891 Ontario Census, Monaghan_South Township, Peterborough County (MP61) About Genealogical Standards & Evidence - A guide for genealogists Abstracts of Births, Deaths & Marriages in the Bytown Gazette from 1836-1845 (and the Bytown Independent for 1836) Accessing Burial Records for Large Cemeteries in Metro Toronto & York Region Alberta Genealogical Society - Relatively - Ancestor Index - Vol 12 - 1987, Vol 14 - 1989, Vol 15 - 1990, Vol 16 - 1991, Vol 17 - 1992, Vol 18 - 1993 - Stored in Black Binder Alberta Genealogical Society Library Holdings 1989 All Saint's Church - Peterborough, Ontario 'Parish founded in 1902' (1875-1983) Along the Gravel Road - A brief history of Cartwright Township - bound with series Alphabetical List of Locations by the Land Board of Newcastle 1819-1825 Ancaster's Heritage - A History of Ancaster Township Ancestor Index - Volume II 1986 - Alberta Genealogy Society Anglican Church Histories - a collection of
    [Show full text]
  • Is the Truth Down There?: Cultural Heritage Conflict and the Politics of Archaeological Authority
    IS THE TRUTH DOWN THERE?: CULTURAL HERITAGE CONFLICT AND THE POLITICS OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL AUTHORITY IAN BARBER PUBLIC HISTORY REVIEW, VOL 13, 2006, PP143-154 enerally it is acknowledged that conflict is axiomatic in any contemporary system of heritage (or cultural) resource management.1 Tunbridge and G Ashworth2 argue that dissonance (‘a discordance or a lack of agreement and consistency’) is ‘intrinsic’ to heritage, since ‘selection is inevitable’ and ‘any creation of heritage from the past disinherits someone [else] completely or partially, actively or potentially’. In this process there may be conflict between stakeholders who feel alienated from the physical reference points of their own past, and those decision-makers who would modify or appropriate that past. In overview, the selection pressures that are at the core of cultural heritage conflicts are complex and wide-ranging. Disagreement spans differences over the treatment and care of sites through to the targeted destruction of cultural property and associated customary communities.3 Affected communities may contest decisions that seem to dismiss their own heritage sites and associated narratives and practices. At the extreme end of the scale, these differences may lead to sectarian violence and the destruction of cultural property. Conflict can also occur between cultural heritage practitioners themselves over how, and even whether, to research the contested past.4 The appeal of the material archaeological record is often enhanced where the past is referenced in postcolonial or nationalist conflicts. In these disputes, archaeologists may be found as expert witnesses in legal proceedings (for example, Sutton’s article in this volume) or as public advocates for or against communities with customary or other cultural heritage associations.5 Newly discovered archaeological features and artifacts may be given considerable if tendentious weight or be subject to critical scrutiny and dismissal.
    [Show full text]
  • Bioarchaeology in the Roman Empire In
    Cite as: Killgrove, K. 2014. Bioarchaeology in the Roman Empire. In Encyclopedia of Global Archaeology, C. Smith, ed., Springer., pp. 876-882. DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4419-0465-2. Bioarchaeology in the Roman Empire In: The Encyclopedia of Global Archaeology Kristina Killgrove University of West Florida Department of Anthropology Introduction Much of a person’s life history is written on his or her bones. Skeletal remains of past populations are palimpsests of information about the behaviors people engaged in during their lives. The bioarchaeological study of burials from around the Roman Empire is a relatively new undertaking but has proven to be an essential line of evidence for understanding the demographic makeup, health status, and dietary regimes of the heterogeneous peoples that comprised the imperial population. Owing to a growing database of skeletal remains, bioarchaeologists are leading the way in answering questions about migration and urban life in the Roman Empire. Through an integration of bioarchaeological studies with traditional analyses of material culture and texts, the diversity of the Romans in all areas of the Empire is becoming apparent. Definition Bioarchaeology is the study of skeletal remains from archaeological sites. The term osteoarchaeology is also used, primarily in Europe, and through the years both terms have been broadly defined as including skeletal material from both humans and animals. Owing to the influence of New Archaeology, however, since the 1970s, bioarchaeology has conventionally dealt with the physical remains of humans from burials found in the archaeological record. In the U.S., bioarchaeology is considered a subspecialty of biological anthropology, whereas in Europe the field is more closely allied with archaeology and anatomy.
    [Show full text]
  • Academic Staff and Honorary Members of the Institute
    ARCHAEOLOGY INTERNATIONAL Kathryn Lomas PhD Academic staffand honorary members of Research Fellow Early writing and literacy; urbanization in . the Institute early Italy; colonization in the _west�rn !"fedl terranean; ethnic and cultural 1dentlty m the Elizabeth Graham PhD ancient world Academic staffand their research Senior Lecturer Kevin MacDonald PhD interests, 2004/2005 Maya archaeology, conquest and contact; Senior Lecturer tropical urbanism; environmental 1mpact; Daniel Antoine PhD African archaeology: West Africanagro­ coastal adaptations; Belize, Cuba Research Fellow pastoral societies and early urbanism, the Bioarchaeology: the biology of ancient Dafydd Griffiths PhD African diaspora; history of archaeology human populations; dental development Lecturer Sally MacDonald BA and histology; palaeopathology Physical-science techniques in archaeology; Museum Manager technology, provenance and deterioration of Eleni Asouti PhD Museum management, marketing and out­ ceramics, glass and stone Research Fellow reach Archaeological and palaeoenvironmental Sue Hamilton PhD interpretation of wood and charco l macro­ Senior Lecturer Richard Macphail PhD � Senior Research Fellow remains; Southwest and South As1a; theory European prehistory, part�cularly th first � Archaeological soil science, especially the and method in archaeobotany millennium BC; technological analys1s of application of micromorphological tech­ prehistoric pottery; landscape archaeology Alexander Bentley PhD niques Research Fellow Robert Harding PhD Neolithic Europe; complexity
    [Show full text]
  • Special Report of the Academic Matters Council Creation of a Concentration in the Anthropology Major: Archaeology and Cultural H
    Sen. Doc. No. 18-067 SPECIAL REPORT OF THE ACADEMIC MATTERS COUNCIL concerning CREATION OF A CONCENTRATION IN THE ANTHROPOLOGY MAJOR: ARCHAEOLOGY AND CULTURAL HERITAGE (#5147) Presented at the 778th Regular Meeting of the Faculty Senate April 26, 2018 COUNCIL MEMBERSHIP ACADEMIC MATTERS COUNCIL Neal Abraham, Wesley Autio, Martha Baker, Carol Barr, Brian Beck, William Brown, Allison Butler, D. Anthony Butterfield, Marcy Clark, Catherine Dimmitt, Sharon Domier, Wei Fan, Diane Flaherty, Laura Francis, Mark Guerber, Jennifer Heuer, Maeve Howett, Patrick Kelly, Kathryn Lachman, Nancy Lamb, Meredith Lind, Linda Lowry, Pamela Marsh-Williams, Roberta Marvin, Ernest May, David Morin, Ruthann Paradise, Jennifer Randall, MJ Peterson, Linda Shea, Chair, Kelly Smiaroski, Kregg Strehorn, Patrick Sullivan, Nancy Symmes, Jack Wileden, Rebecca Woodland, Kate Woodmansee, Clare McGladrigan, and Colleen Coakley ACADEMIC MATTERS COUNCIL The Academic Matters Council recommends approval of this proposal. Please describe your proposal The major does not currently have formal concentrations that are tracked as degree requirements. The proposal consolidates and formalizes existing informal areas of concentration. Currently, our major offers six informal concentrations that serve as advising tools and offer students some limited conceptual structure for how coursework might be organized. As noted, there are no requirements for these concentrations. The proposal focuses the concentrations (reducing the number from six to four), provides formal criteria and requirements for each concentration, and builds more structure into the major. The Archaeology and Cultural Heritage Concentration integrates two of our existing informal concentrations—1) Archaeology Sen. Doc. No. 18-067 and Cultural Heritage and 2) Native American and Indigenous studies—into this formal concentration.
    [Show full text]
  • The Reconstruction of a Bronze Battle Axe and Comparison of Inflicted
    Journal of Imaging Article The Reconstruction of a Bronze Battle Axe and Comparison of Inflicted Damage Injuries Using Neutron Tomography, Manufacturing Modeling, and X-ray Microtomography Data Maria Mednikova 1,* , Irina Saprykina 1,2, Sergey Kichanov 2 and Denis Kozlenko 2 1 Department of Theory and Methods, Institute of Archaeology RAS, 117036 Moscow, Russia; [email protected] 2 Frank Laboratory of Neutron Physics, Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, 141980 Dubna, Russia; [email protected] (S.K.); [email protected] (D.K.) * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +7-916-714-4625 Received: 14 April 2020; Accepted: 3 June 2020; Published: 8 June 2020 Abstract: A massive bronze battle axe from the Abashevo archaeological culture was studied using neutron tomography and manufacturing modeling from production molds. Detailed structural data were acquired to simulate and model possible injuries and wounds caused by this battle axe. We report the results of neutron tomography experiments on the bronze battle axe, as well as manufactured plastic and virtual models of the traumas obtained at different strike angles from this axe. The reconstructed 3D models of the battle axe, plastic imprint model, and real wound and trauma traces on the bones of the ancient peoples of the Abashevo archaeological culture were obtained. Skulls with traces of injuries originate from archaeological excavations of the Pepkino burial mound of the Abashevo culture in the Volga region. The reconstruction and identification of the injuries and type of weapon on the restored skulls were performed. The complementary use of 3D visualization methods allowed us to make some assumptions on the cause of death of the people of the Abashevo culture and possible intra-tribal conflict in this cultural society.
    [Show full text]