Abstract

During the last decade, some of the most significant archaeological interpretations included the integrated use of scientific methods, including osteoarchaeology. The identification, analysis and interpretation of human and animal remains from archaeological sites has been developing along increasingly different trajectories, due to the different aspects of daily life the bones of animals and humans illustrate. This paper is a review of the position osteoarchaeological research has achieved since the 1960s, through the example of its beginnings in the mid-20th century in Sweden. Similarities and differences between the histories, contents of and directions in human and animal osteoarchaeology are reviewed, revealing some controversies in the ways the results of the discipline have been embraced by the broader archaeological community. Similarly to archaeological research, increasingly complex analytical methods help refining results obtained by traditional morphometric methods applied to bones. This trend will continue in the foreseeable future: scientific methods will keep on contributing to valuable insights into past societies. Special sections in the paper are devoted to the possibilities of disseminating the results of osteoarchaeology through formal and informal networks such as publications, teaching and conferences within the context of the Baltic region through the example of archaeozoological research.

Highlights

  • Archaeology should ab ovo be a transdisciplinary subject

  • According to Kristiansen (2014, p. 14) this ca. 1850–1860 period may be considered the first scientific revolution in archaeology, when it emerged as an independent discipline in a close cooperation with zoology and geology

  • As New Archaeology became increasingly popular in the US, Marshall Sahlins, an authority in modern anthropology, referred to the ‘characteristic failing of interdisciplinary study – an enterprise which often seems to merit definition as the process by which the unknowns of one’s own subject matter are multiplied by the uncertainties of some other science.’ (Sahlins, 1972, p. 51)

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Archaeology should ab ovo be a transdisciplinary subject. In Scandinavia there has been exemplary cooperation between archaeology and the natural sciences as early as the mid-19th century (Forchhammer et al, 1851–1856), setting an example for osteoarchaeological studies across 20th century Europe (Bökönyi, 1992, 400). An ever increasing number of archaeological projects have been using data provided by the natural sciences, including new perspectives in the study of ancient humans and animals. Osteoarchaeology is the study of both animal and human remains from archaeological sites. It falls within the disciplinary overlap between natural sciences and humanities as, in this case, osteological data form the basis of our archaeological interpretations of culture and history

Objectives
Findings
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call