DOCSLIB.ORG

Ucl Institute of Archaeology

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Ucl Institute of Archaeology Institute of Archaeology Potential changes in the light of the Coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic Please note that information regarding teaching, learning and assessment in this module handbook endeavours to be as accurate as possible. However, in the light of the Coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, the changeable nature of the situation and the possibility of updates in government guidance, there may need to be changes during the course of the year. UCL will keep current students updated of any changes to teaching, learning and assessment on the Students’ webpages. This also includes Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) which may help you with any queries that you may have. ARCL0156: Funerary Archaeology 2020-21, Term 1/2 MA/MSc module 15 credits A former mummy of the Late Bronze Age from Cladh Hallan, South Uist, Scotland Co-ordinator: MIKE PARKER PEARSON [email protected] Office hours: 2.00-400 Tuesdays Contact me at any time by email. You can also leave messages on the ARCL0156 Moodle Forum. Please refer to the online IoA Student Handbook (https://www.ucl.ac.uk/archaeology/current- students/ioa-student-handbook) and IoA Study Skills Guide (https://www.ucl.ac.uk/archaeology/current-students/ioa-study-skills-guide) for instructions on coursework submission, IoA referencing guidelines and marking criteria, as well as UCL policies on penalties for late submission. 1 ARCL0156 1. MODULE OVERVIEW Module Description How we dispose of and commemorate our dead is fundamental to human culture. Human remains are some of the most significant archaeological finds and archaeologists have to know something about the diversity of attitudes and practices relating to the dead. This half-module begins with the study of methods and techniques of analysis, followed by a survey of contemporary societies' funerary practices and the variety of human responses to death. It then focuses on the interpretive theories and models that have been used to reconstruct the social significance of funerary treatment in past societies. Case studies will focus on the interpretation of rank and status, ritual and symbolism, territory and legitimation, and the ethical and legal aspects of exhumation and reburial. These studies will range across a wide variety of periods and places, from the Lower Palaeolithic to the present day. Module Aims This half-module’s aims are: to evaluate different types of archaeological and historical evidence to integrate this variety of evidence in a theoretically informed manner to develop developed a critical awareness of the ritual, political, social and economic factors influencing funerary practices to investigate a range of themes and patterns of human behaviour in funerary archaeology to explore the relationship between material culture and funerary practices to apply this knowledge to a range of archaeological periods, appreciating the need for a broad geographical and chronological approach Learning Outcomes On successful completion of the module, students should be able to demonstrate/have developed: • a good knowledge of the principles and practice of funerary archaeology • engagement with different forms of evidence and methodologies, and understanding of how to use them critically in class discussions and writing assessments • a nuanced understanding of the themes and controversies surrounding the study of funerary archaeology • knowledge of methods and theories of archaeological, anthropological and historical analysis in funerary studies, and the ability to apply them to archaeological data. Methods of Assessment This module is assessed by means of two pieces of coursework, each of 1,900-2,100 words, which each contribute 50% to the final grade for the module. Penalties will only be imposed if you exceed the upper figure in the range. There is no penalty for using fewer words than the lower figure in the range: the lower figure is simply for your guidance to indicate the sort of length that is expected. Communications Moodle is the main hub for this course. Important information will be posted by staff in the Announcements section of the Moodle page and you will automatically receive an email notification for these. 2 ARCL0156 Please post any general queries relating to module content, assessments and administration by email. For personal queries, please contact the co-ordinator by email. Week-by-week summary Week Date Topic Lecturer 1 6/10/20 Funerary archaeology: an introduction MPP 2 13/10/20 Principles of analysis MPP 3 20/10/20 Ethnoarchaeology of death MPP 4 27/10/20 Reading the body MPP 5 3/11/20 Bodies, status and power MPP 6 READING WEEK 7 17/11/20 Death in the landscape MPP 8 24/11/20 Death and human consciousness MPP 9 1/12/20 The human experience of death MPP 10 8/12/20 The politics of the dead MPP 11 15/12/20 Review session/ discussion forum MPP Lecturer: Mike Parker Pearson Weekly Module Plan The module is taught through lectures and discussions. Students will be required to undertake set readings, complete pre-class activities and actively participate in discussion. Tues 4.00-6.00: Tutorial sessions (Lectures for following week available after each session.) Workload This is a 15-credit module which equates to 150 hours of learning time including session preparation, background reading, and researching and writing your assignments. With that in mind you should expect to organise your time in roughly this way: 20 hours Staff-led teaching sessions (lectures, tutorials) 60 hours Self-guided session preparation (reading, listening, note-taking and online activities), about 6 hours a week 35 hours Reading for, and writing essay 1 35 hours Reading for, and writing, essay 2 3 ARCL0156 2. ASSESSMENT Essay 1 (1,900-2,100 words) submission date: Monday 23 November 2020 (Target return: 30 November 2020) Essay 2 (1,900-2,100 words) submission date: Monday 11 January 2021 (Target return: 18 January 2021) Each assignment and possible approaches to it will be discussed in class, in advance of the submission deadline. If students are unclear about the nature of an assignment, they should discuss this with the Module Co-ordinator in advance (via email or class Moodle forum). You will receive feedback on your written coursework via Moodle, and have the opportunity to discuss your marks and feedback with the co-ordinator. For more details see the ‘Assessment’ section on Moodle. The IoA marking criteria can be found in the IoA Student Handbook (Section 12- information on assessment) and the IoA Study Skills Guide provides useful guidance on writing different types of assignment. Penalties for late submission: see UCL guidance on penalties (Academic Manual 3.12). Assessment 1 (Essay 1) Submission date: Monday 23 November 2020 Essay 1a: Was the Iceman a burial or ritual deposition or did he suffer a lonely death on top of the Alps? Introductory reading: Vanzetti, A., Vidale, M., Gallinaro, M., Frayer, D.W. and Bondioli, L. 2010. The iceman as a burial. Antiquity 84: 681-69. Online Zink, A., Graefen, A., Oeggl, K., Dickson, J., Leitner, W., Kaufmann, G., Fleckinger, A., Gostner, P. and Egarter-Vigl E. 2011. The Iceman is not a burial: reply to Vanzetti et al. (2010). Antiquity 85. Online Fasolo, R. 2011. The death and ritual deposition of the 'Iceman': a hypothetical scenario. Antiquity 85. http://www.antiquity.ac.uk/projgall/fasolo327/ Carancini, G.L. and Mattioli, T. 2011. ‘The Iceman is a burial’: new remarks. Antiquity 85 https://www.academia.edu/456177/The_Iceman_is_a_burial_new_remarks Skeates, R. 2014. Communicating over space and time in the world of the Iceman. In S. Souvatzi and A. Hadji (eds) Space and Time in Mediterranean Prehistory. New York: Routledge. 138-59. Durham Research Online http://dro.dur.ac.uk/16785/1/16785.pdf?DDD6+drk0rgs+dul4eg Essay 1b: In what ways are landscapes of the dead changing in the UK? Introductory reading: Clayden, A. Hockey, J. and Powell, M. 2010. Natural burial: the de-materialising of death? In J. Hockey, C. Komaromy, and K. Woodthorpe (eds) The Matter of Death: space, place and materiality. London: Palgrave Macmillan. 148-164. Online Clayden, A., Green, T., Hockey, J. and Powell, M. 2014. Natural Burial: landscape, practice and experience. London: Routledge. INST ARCH AH CLA & Online Hockey, J. Green, T. Clayden, A. and Powell, M. 2012. Landscapes of the dead? Natural burial and the materialisation of absence. Journal of Material Culture 17: 115-32. Online Rugg, J. 2006. Lawn cemeteries: the emergence of a new landscape of death. Urban History 33: 213-33. https://www.jstor.org/stable/44614196 4 ARCL0156 Essay 1c: To what extent are archaeologists now able to make well-substantiated claims about cannibalism from archaeological evidence? Introductory reading: Boulestin, B., Zeeb-Lanz, A., Jeunesse, C., Haack, F., Arbogast, R.-M. and Denaire, A. 2009. Mass cannibalism in the Linear Pottery Culture at Herxheim (Palatinate, Germany). Antiquity 83: 968-82. Online Degusta, D. 2000. Fijian cannibalism and mortuary ritual: bioarchaeological evidence from Vunda. International Journal of Osteoarchaeology 10: 76-92. Online Koon H.E.C. 2012. Using transmission electron microscopy imaging to detect cooked bone. In L. Bell (ed.) Forensic microscopy and skeletal tissues: methods and protocols. Methods in Molecular Biology 915. Online Koon H.E.C., Collins M., O'Connor, T. and Covington T. 2010. Sorting the butchered from the boiled. Journal of Archaeological Science 37(1): 62-9. Online Lambert, P.M., Leonard, B.L., Billman, B.R. Marlar, R.A., Newman, M.E. and Reinhard, K.J. 2000. Response to critique of the claim of cannibalism at Cowboy Wash. American Antiquity 65: 397-406. Online Rautman, A.E. and Fenton, T.W. 2005. A case of historic cannibalism in the American West: implications for Southwestern archaeology. American Antiquity 70: 321-41. Online Solari, A., Olivera, D., Gordillo, I., Bosch, P., Fetter, G., Lara, V.H.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 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]
  • Silbury Hill – А Case Study with LANDSCAPE ARCHAEOLOGY: SILBURY HILL – a CASE STUDY LIONEL LIONEL SIMS LIONEL SIMS
    VI. LANDSCAPE ARCHAEOLOGY AND ARCHAEOASTRONOMY INTEGRATING ARCHAEOASTRONOMY Integrating Archaeology: with Landscape ArchaeoastronomySilbury Hill – а Case Study WITH LANDSCAPE ARCHAEOLOGY: SILBURY HILL – A CASE STUDY LIONEL LIONEL SIMS LIONEL SIMS Abstract Weaknesses in both archaeoastronomy and landscape archaeology can be overcome by their combination. This is demonstrat- ed through a new interpretation of Silbury Hill in Avebury, Wiltshire. If monuments in their local landscape are considered as one choice in a system of alternatives, tests can be devised to intepret the prehistoric builders‘ intentions. This exercise finds that the builders chose a prescriptive arrangement of views of Silbury Hill to simulate a facsimile of the moon entering and returning from the underworld. Key words: dark moon, crescent moon, paired alignments, Silbury Hill, West Kennet Avenue, Beckhampton Avenue, Ave- bury, underworld. Introduction with a level circular summit platform.To date, no con- vincing explanation as to its meaning has been offered. Archaeoastronomy has to move on from the legacy of Archaeologists have long expected that excavating the the Thom paradigm if it is to prove its relevance to sci- interior of the hill would reveal burials or deposited ar- ence (Sims 2006). Over the last three decades the dis- tefacts that would provide the clues to its decoding. In cipline has established robust field methods procedures spite of the many tunnels that have been dug, so much and, in so doing, falsified Thom‘s claim for a prehis- so that the Hill has now to be rescued from imminent toric precision astronomy (Thom 1971; Ruggles 1999; collapse, no burials have been found nor interpretive Hoskin 2001, Belmonte 2006; Schaefer 1993; North breakthroughs made.
    [Show full text]
  • Reconstructing Bell Beaker Society
    Contents About 4 Timetable 5 Thursday, 21 January 2021: Morning Session..........................5 Thursday, 21 January 2021: Afternoon Session.........................6 Friday, 22 January 2021: Morning Session...........................7 Friday, 22 January 2021: Afternoon Session..........................8 Abstracts 9 Thursday Morning (21.01.2021): Archaeological Material ...................9 Thursday Afternoon (21.01.2021): Archaeological Material .................. 17 Friday Morning (22.01.2021): Funerary Archaeology and Anthropology ........... 26 Friday Afternoon (22.01.2021): Reconstructing Bell Beaker Society ............. 34 List of Authors 41 Practical Information 42 Virtual Workshops......................................... 42 Publication............................................. 43 3 About The first "Archéologie et Gobelets" conference, founded by Marie Besse, Maxence Bailly, Fabien Convertini, and Laure Salanova, took place in Geneva, Switzerland in 1996. For the past 25 years, the goal of this conference has been to bring together researchers of the Bell Beaker and Final Neolithic periods as well as the Early Bronze Age in order to encourage collaborations between institutions and to initiate contacts between junior and senior researchers. "Archéologie et Gobelets" 2021 at the University of Geneva The Laboratory of prehistoric archaeology and anthropology at the University of Geneva is happy to host the next “Archéologie et Gobelets” conference in Geneva, Switzerland. This year will involve the conference’s first sessions in a virtual format, with all presentations and discussions passing through a virtual platform. For this reason, we have waived all conference fees. The goal of this year’s theme, “The Bell Beaker Culture in All its Forms”, is to bring together the various fields working to better understand the Bell Beaker culture. During these two days of presentations, we look forward to hearing about recent and ongoing work from both junior and senior researchers.
    [Show full text]
  • ARCHY 469 – Theory in Archaeology
    ARCHY 469 – Theory in Archaeology Lecture: TTh 1:30 – 3:20pm, SMI 307 Instructor: Debora C. Trein Instructor’s office: DEN 133 Office Hours: F 11:30 – 1:30pm, or by appointment Email: [email protected] Source: unknown artist Course Description: How do we go from artifacts to statements about the lives of people in the past? How much of the past can we truly know, when most of the pertinent evidence has long since degraded, and when the people we aim to study are long dead? This course provides a broad survey of the major theoretical trends that have shaped anthropological archaeology over time. We will outline and examine some of the major publications, debates, and shifts in archaeological thought that have influenced the diverse ways in which we claim to know what we know about the past. In this course, we will explore the notion that the various intellectual approaches we employ to make statements about the past are influenced by the different perspectives we have of the relationship between the past and the present, the kinds of meaning we believe can be derived from the archaeological record, the questions we seek to answer, and the methods we use to retrieve (and prioritize) information. This course will start with a broad overview of the major periods of theoretical development in archaeology from the 1800s to the present, followed by discussions of how archaeologists tackle common archaeological questions through diverse theoretical lenses (and why sometimes they don’t tackle these questions at all). While the politics of archaeological practice will be 1 | Page touched upon throughout the course, we will devote the last quarter of the course to the repercussions of archaeological practice to present-day communities and stakeholders.
    [Show full text]
  • Landscape Archaeology - M
    ARCHAEOLOGY – Vol. I - Landscape Archaeology - M. Gojda LANDSCAPE ARCHAEOLOGY M. Gojda Institute of Archaeology, Czech Academy of Sciences, Czech Republic Keywords: landscape, space, site, monument, archaeology, geography, survey, mapping, fieldwalking, non-destructivity. Contents 1. The Concept of Landscape: Past and Present 1.1 Perceptions of the Landscape and their Reflection in the Arts 1.2 Contemporary Views of the Landscape in Philosophy and the Natural Sciences 1.3 The Landscape Phenomenon in Contemporary Archaeology and Anthropology 2. Sites and Monuments in the Context of Landscape 2.1 The Birth of Interest: Founding Fathers 2.2 New Impulses: Crawford and his Discoveries 2.3 From the Archaeology of Settlements to the Archaeology of Landscapes 3. The Main Fields Concerned with Understanding Landscape Archetypes 3.1 Landscape and Spatial Archaeology 3.2 Historical and Settlement Geography, Cartography, GIS 4. Non-Destructiveness and Future Developments in Landscape Archaeology Glossary Bibliography Biographical Sketch Summary The gradually increasing awareness of the deep mutual relationships between the natural and social environments determines the ever more pronounced contemporary orientation of archaeology towards the protection and study of cultural landscapes and their historical development. The landscape is a phenomenon claimed by the advocates of both positivist (scientific) and postmodern approaches to archaeology. Each has found within it inspiration for the expansion of its paradigms. A summary is presented of the understanding to date of the landscape phenomenon and the expression of man’s relation to it in the arts, philosophy, natural sciences, and particularly in archaeology and anthropology.UNESCO The roots of the –burge EOLSSoning interest in the discovery and documentation of monuments in the landscape, and of the tracing of their relationships both to natural landscapeSAMPLE components and to eaCHAPTERSch other, are examined.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Report 2016
    2016 Annual Report Board of Trustees Contents Message from the director 7 MANAGEMENT 9 About us: Big general data for 2016 11 Staff 14 Scientific Advisory Board 19 RESEARCH 21 Research Groups 23 Research Projects Hosted by IPHES 29 Research Projects not Hosted by IPHES 33 Research Fellowships 37 Publications 40 Activity as Referee 54 Fieldwork activity 58 Congresses, workshops & seminars 63 Short-term stay at other research centers 79 ACADEMY 83 Degrees and Doctoral Programme 85 PhD Thesis supervised and defended 87 Master Thesis supervised and defended 89 Participation in assessment Committees to evaluate PhD 93 OUTREACH 95 Conferences and talks 97 Outreach publications 104 Science education 105 Management of exhibitions 107 Participatory activities 109 Didactic contents and materials 109 Science Communication 110 KNOWLEDGE TRANSFER & SERVICES 117 2016 Message from the director Robert Sala, IPHES director/IPHES theless they still need an increase in st It is for me a pleasure to introduce the number of papers within the 1 the 2016 Annual Report of Activ- quartile. After accomplishing with ities of the Catalan Institute of Hu- good absolute figures is time for our man Palaeoecology and Social institute to gain the relative score in Evolution. IPHES is a mature institute excellence and increase our cur- st hosting very active research teams rent 31.8% of 1 quartile papers. devoted to the creation and social- isation of knowledge on the human The visibility of the research of an in- evolutionary process in all its dimen- stitute can be also measured by its sions and framework. The scientific presence in the main international activity of our institute is currently congresses.
    [Show full text]
  • Shanti Morell-Hart's CV
    SHANTI MORELL-HART Department of Anthropology, Stanford University, Building 50, 450 Serra Mall, Stanford, CA 94305-2034 39 Boardman Place, #204, San Francisco, CA 94103 Phone: (415) 747-0698 Email: [email protected] _______________________________________________________________________________ EDUCATION: 2002-2011: Ph.D. in Anthropology, the University of California at Berkeley (UCB) Dissertation title: Paradigms and Syntagms of Ethnobotanical Practice in Ancient Northwestern Honduras . Committee members: Rosemary Joyce (Anthropology), Christine Hastorf (Anthropology), Louise Fortmann (Environmental Science and Policy Management). 2003: M.A. in Anthropology, the University of California at Berkeley (UCB). 1999-2002: M.A. coursework in Anthropology, the University of Texas at San Antonio (UTSA). 1994-1998: B.A. in Latin American Studies (Concentration in Anthropology) B.A. in Anthropology (Bio-Archaeology Track) Wesleyan University, Middletown, CT Senior Project title: Insect Feasts of Mexico: Aztec Entomophagy and its Eradication and/or Appropriation by the Spanish. 1997: Coursework in History, Literature, and Archaeology (conducted in Spanish) at La Universidad Autonoma de Yucatan, Merida, Mexico. TEACHING EXPERIENCE: 2013-present: Lecturer at Stanford University, Stanford, CA. Courses ([undergraduate course number]/ [graduate course number]): Anthro 100B/200B: Lifeways of the Ancient Maya (AU13) Anthro 114B/200B: Landscape Archaeology and Global Information Systematics (WI14) Anthro 100B/200B: Peoples and Cultures of Ancient Mesoamerica
    [Show full text]
  • An Archaeology of Landscapes: Perspectives and Directions
    P1: GFU/GDB/GDX/LMD/GCX P2: GCR Journal of Archaeological Research [jar] PP078-295745 April 20, 2001 8:23 Style file version Nov. 19th, 1999 Journal of Archaeological Research, Vol. 9, No. 2, 2001 An Archaeology of Landscapes: Perspectives and Directions Kurt F. Anschuetz,1,4 Richard H. Wilshusen,2 and Cherie L. Scheick3 This review calls for the definition of a landscape approach in archaeology. After tracing the development of the landscape idea over its history in the social sciences and examining the compatibility between this concept and traditional archaeolog- ical practice, we suggest that archaeology is particularly well suited among the social sciences for defining and applying a landscape approach. If archaeologists are to use the landscape paradigm as a “pattern which connects” human behavior with particular places and times, however, we need a common terminology and methodology to build a construct paradigm. We suggest that settlement ecology, ritual landscapes, and ethnic landscapes will contribute toward the definition of such a broadly encompassing paradigm that also will facilitate dialogue between archaeologists and traditional communities. KEY WORDS: landscape; culture; paradigm; epistemology. INTRODUCTION The intellectual foundations of contemporary landscape approaches in ar- chaeology may be traced back to at least the 1920s (Stoddard and Zubrow, 1999, p. 686; discussed later). Despite their historical depth in the discipline’s develop- ment, until recently landscape approaches largely were subsumed within archae- ological inquiry to provide a backdrop against which material traces were plotted and evaluated (Knapp and Ashmore, 1999). Now, as evident from a review of the previous decade of Society for American Archaeology Annual Meeting Abstracts, 1Rio Grande Foundation for Communities and Cultural Landscapes, Santa Fe, New Mexico 87504- 8617.
    [Show full text]
  • Archaeology: the Key Concepts Is the Ideal Reference Guide for Students, Teachers and Anyone with an Interest in Archaeology
    ARCHAEOLOGY: THE KEY CONCEPTS This invaluable resource provides an up-to-date and comprehensive survey of key ideas in archaeology and their impact on archaeological thinking and method. Featuring over fifty detailed entries by international experts, the book offers definitions of key terms, explaining their origin and development. Entries also feature guides to further reading and extensive cross-referencing. Subjects covered include: ● Thinking about landscape ● Cultural evolution ● Social archaeology ● Gender archaeology ● Experimental archaeology ● Archaeology of cult and religion ● Concepts of time ● The Antiquity of Man ● Feminist archaeology ● Multiregional evolution Archaeology: The Key Concepts is the ideal reference guide for students, teachers and anyone with an interest in archaeology. Colin Renfrew is Emeritus Disney Professor of Archaeology and Fellow of the McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research, Cambridge. Paul Bahn is a freelance writer, translator and broadcaster on archaeology. YOU MAY ALSO BE INTERESTED IN THE FOLLOWING ROUTLEDGE STUDENT REFERENCE TITLES: Archaeology: The Basics Clive Gamble Ancient History: Key Themes and Approaches Neville Morley Who’s Who in Ancient Egypt Michael Rice Who’s Who in the Ancient Near East Gwendolyn Leick Who’s Who in the Greek World John Hazel Who’s Who in the Roman World John Hazel ARCHAEOLOGY The Key Concepts Edited by Colin Renfrew and Paul Bahn LONDON AND NEW YORK First published 2005 by Routledge 2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX 14 4RN Simultaneously published in the USA and Canada by Routledge 270 Madison Ave., New York, NY 10016 Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group This edition published in the Taylor & Francis e-Library, 2005.
    [Show full text]
  • Investigation Into the Implications of Zooarchaeological Studies for Climate Reconstruction in the No
    SIT Graduate Institute/SIT Study Abroad SIT Digital Collections Independent Study Project (ISP) Collection SIT Study Abroad Fall 2016 Independent Study Project: Investigation into the implications of zooarchaeological studies for climate reconstruction in the North Atlantic; zooarchaeological research at the Agricultural University of Iceland, Reykjavík Hazel Cashman SIT Study Abroad Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcollections.sit.edu/isp_collection Part of the Animal Studies Commons, Eastern European Studies Commons, Human Geography Commons, Nature and Society Relations Commons, Place and Environment Commons, and the Scandinavian Studies Commons Recommended Citation Cashman, Hazel, "Independent Study Project: Investigation into the implications of zooarchaeological studies for climate reconstruction in the North Atlantic; zooarchaeological research at the Agricultural University of Iceland, Reykjavík" (2016). Independent Study Project (ISP) Collection. 2451. https://digitalcollections.sit.edu/isp_collection/2451 This Unpublished Paper is brought to you for free and open access by the SIT Study Abroad at SIT Digital Collections. It has been accepted for inclusion in Independent Study Project (ISP) Collection by an authorized administrator of SIT Digital Collections. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Independent Study Project: Investigation into the implications of zooarchaeological studies for climate reconstruction in the North Atlantic; zooarchaeological research at the Agricultural
    [Show full text]
  • Virtually Dead: Digital Public Mortuary Archaeology
    Virtually Dead: Digital Public Mortuary Archaeology Howard Williams1 and Alison Atkin2 Cite this as: Williams, H. and Atkin, A. 2015 Virtually Dead: Digital Public Mortuary Archaeology, Internet Archaeology 40. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.11141/ia.40.7.4 1. History and Archaeology Department, University of Chester, UK [email protected] http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3510-6852 2. Department of Archaeology, University of Sheffield, UK [email protected] http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2249-8781 Key words: communication, community archaeology, digital media, digital public archaeology This publication is open access and made possible by the generous support of Manchester Metropolitan University. © Author(s). Except where otherwise noted, content from this work may be used under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported licence, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided that attribution to the author(s), the title of the work, the Internet Archaeology journal and the relevant URL/DOI is given. Summary Over recent decades, the ethics, politics and public engagements of mortuary archaeology have received sustained scrutiny, including how we handle, write about and display the archaeological dead. Yet the burgeoning use of digital media to engage different audiences in the archaeology of death and burial have so far escaped attention. This article explores categories and strategies by which digital media create virtual communities engaging with mortuary archaeology. Considering digital public mortuary archaeology (DPMA) as a distinctive theme linking archaeology, mortality and material culture, we discuss blogs, vlogs and Twitter as case studies to illustrate the variety of strategies by which digital media can promote, educate and engage public audiences with archaeological projects and research relating to death and the dead in the human past.
    [Show full text]
  • How the Perception of Identity in Roman Funerary Archaeology Developed in Slovenia
    Stemberger, K. 2020. Identity Through the Looking Glass: How the Perception of Identity in Roman Funerary Archaeology Developed in Slovenia. Theoretical Roman Archaeology Journal, 3(1): 7, pp. 1–15. DOI: https://doi.org/ 10.16995/traj.423 RESEARCH ARTICLE Identity Through the Looking Glass: How the Perception of Identity in Roman Funerary Archaeology Developed in Slovenia Kaja Stemberger Independent researcher, SI [email protected] This paper addresses how the changes in Slovenian politics have been influencing the inter- pretation of identity in the sphere of Roman mortuary archaeology. The paper starts with an overview of the political history of Slovenia, separated into three phases: the period until 1945, the Yugoslav period (1945–1990), and independent Slovenia (1991–present). The second part of the paper focusses on theoretical studies directly discussing identity of the deceased in Roman period Slovenia. The majority of such studies is centred on the material from larger cemeteries, notably those of Colonia Ulpia Traiana Poetovio (modern Ptuj) and Colonia Iulia Emona (modern Ljubljana), of which the latter is better documented and researched. The paper concludes with a discussion of the potential for future studies. Keywords: Roman archaeology; History of archaeology; Identity Introduction This article aims to examine how the context—political, cultural, ethnic, historical, personal—of the researcher as an individual human being influences their work. The idea sprouted from a study on the role of communication and linguistic theory in archaeology (Stemberger Flegar 2020), which discussed the ways in which language and communication can influence understanding of the theory. It soon became clear that language is only one of the factors which affect our understanding of the world.
    [Show full text]