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. Printed on acid-free paper Springer International Publishing AG Switzerland is part of Springer Science+Business Media (www. springer.com) For Tony & Dedicated to the memories of my mother, Gwyneth Tilley, and my father, Derek Tilley. Foreword This volume kicks off a new book series, Bioarchaeology and Social Theory, in a grand and illustrative manner. The series highlights the application of social theo- ries in interpreting data derived from bioarchaeological research. Social theory bridges data with explanation and focuses on cultural processes such as power, ide- ology, symbols, meaning, social structures, agency and identity. The series pro- motes studies that link past understandings with present-day problem solving. These studies emphasise ethical and critical considerations of bioarchaeological research. Disease is a perennial topic of interest to a broad range of social and natural scientists and the public. Being able to systematically place disease within a broader framework to understand its impact on individuals, communities and societies can only be done utilising a framework that is integrative across environmental, biological and cultural domains. Traditionally, bioarchaeological approaches to disease have focused more on the pathology itself. From this, generalisations are made about the effects of disease or temporal/spatial changes in the disease. This volume provides a scientifi cally based and theoretically enriched model for how to go from descrip- tions of disease to a discussion of possibilities for what that disease meant for caregiving and caretaking. This model stresses the need for careful and considered analysis of the disease process across life history. Differential diagnosis, medical and clinical understanding of the disease, and the complexities of the biocultural context within which the individual was living are utilised in a systematic and straightforward manner. This study covers a new area of research in which it becomes possible to discuss disease processes, disability and impairment with specifi city and attention to the appropriate clinical and medical literature. Extending this baseline data into an interpretation of care and caregiving as well as the role of agency by the person with the health problem and by their kinfolk or extended family are all carefully considered. The author provides, at every step, the published criticisms of moving beyond the realm of the empirical data derived from the skeleton into more ideological and cultural behaviours involved in caregiving. Providing a point-by-point counter to the general criticism that caretaking can never be empirically proven for past vii viii Foreword peoples, a sound counter-argument is made for how to approach reconstructing caregiving and caretaking behaviour. Not only does this volume link social theory with bioarchaeology, but it provides a hands-on how-to manual for carrying this research into ever-expanding regions and time periods. This work can be used by anyone interested in palaeopathology and bioarchaeology to test drive the model to see if it improves upon older methodo- logical approaches to disease. This volume also speaks to the growing interest in scale, that is, in moving between individual, population and regional analyses. It addresses important health issues that have implications for enriching and expanding our understanding of human behaviour into new areas of study. An argument can be made that these kinds of carefully analysed case studies may be useful in con- temporary settings to explicate where resources or public policies might be better aimed to provide better care for people living in places where health care is less than optimal. The value of the case study approach while utilising a range of social theory about dimensions of human propensities and behaviours cannot be stressed enough. This work represents the wave of the future and the direction that bioarchaeological studies are beginning to take. This kind of integrative, contextualised and compre- hensive approach to the topic of disease and care is groundbreaking and it has potential to add new dimensions to bioarchaeological research in the future. Debra L. Martin Acknowledgements I think of this book as both an end and a beginning. An end, because it is the refi ned version of the Ph.D. thesis (submitted in 2013) in which I fi rst laid out the bioarchaeology of care approach I spent years of study developing—fi nally, here is my public exposition of theory and practice! A beginning, because I know that this new approach has the potential to go further than I have gone with it, and I can only hope that other bioarchaeologists will take what speaks to them about the theory and practice of the bioarchaeology of care as presented here—and make it their own. It is diffi cult to know where to start acknowledging the support I have received. But I will begin with a general expression of gratitude for the acceptance and gen- erosity of spirit in relation to my research that I have encountered both among prac- titioners of (bio)archaeology, palaeopathology and anthropology, and—which surprised me more—among members of the general public. I have received mes- sages expressing interest and encouragement from people from different walks of life and from all parts of the world, and their enthusiasm has kept me going even when frustration threatened to overwhelm endeavour. Some people have been invaluable in making my work possible, however. Firstly, I must thank Marc Oxenham (Australian National University), who was my Ph.D. supervisor and with whom I have co-authored a number of papers. As my supervisor, Marc gave me complete freedom to develop my own ideas and directions without attempting to impose limits, and as my colleague he has been unfailingly encouraging and fi ercely supportive of my research. Without Marc, I may never have undertaken the work that led to the realised bioarchaeology of care approach— and to this book. Next, I must thank Tony Cameron, on two counts. It is convention to thank one’s partner in the fi nal paragraphs of the “Acknowledgements,” and Tony certainly deserves my deep gratitude—and admiration—for putting up with me dur- ing my research for, and writing of, my thesis and this book; more than this, he has been loving, patient, understanding and supportive—and what more could one ask for? However, I must also formally acknowledge Tony’s role in producing the Index of Care, the online instrument supporting the bioarchaeology of care methodology. While I am solely responsible for the design and contents of the Index, and any criticism must fall on my shoulders, Tony, an information technology professional, must ix x Acknowledgements take all credit for converting this design into a user-friendly application. And fi nally, my deepest gratitude goes to Jane Buikstra (Arizona State University) and Debra Martin (University of Nevada, Las Vegas), giants in the fi eld of bioarchaeology and indefatigable in furthering this most exciting of disciplines. Jane and Debra have mentored and motivated me with an entirely selfl ess grace and patience from the time that I fi rst went public with the bioarchaeology of care to this day, and without their continuing constructive, critical and very practical support and encouragement I am not sure how far this new approach would have gone. Development and testing of the bioarchaeology of care methodology (and subse- quently the Index of Care) relied on access to skeletal remains. Many institutions (and many curators) cooperated in this regard, and I am very grateful to the follow- ing for allowing me to work with their collections: Gail Boyle, Bristol City Museum and Art Gallery (UK); Alison Brookes, Corinium Museum (UK); Steve Burrow, National Museum Wales (UK); Ann-Rachael Harwood, Cheltenham Art Gallery and Museum (UK); David Rice, Gloucester City Museum and Art Gallery (UK); Jiří Svoboda, Paleolithic and Paleoethnology Research Centre, Dolní Věstonice (Czech Republic); Petr Veleminsky, Prague National Museum (Czech Republic) and Amélie Vialet, L’Institut de Paléontologie Humaine (France). In relation to Chap. 8 case study, I wish to thank the Institute of Archaeology, Hanoi, Vietnam, Hirofumi Matsumura of the Sapporo Medical School, Hokkaido, Japan, and Damien Huffer (then Australian National University) for their roles in the excavation of Man Bac Burial 9 (part of this research was funded under an Australian Research Council Discovery Grant).

Load more