Dear all
Please find below a call for papers and posters for a session based on the
classification of sites. If there is enough interest, I will put it forward for
inclusion in the ICAZ conference. This is an area I am very interested in, and
would very much like to see what others have to think about it - please
forward it on to those in other fields who may also be interested.
Thank you for your time
Matty
Bringing sites back to life – how far can faunal evidence be used to
reconstruct site types?
Many sites are classified based on structural evidence, and how they fit within
a pre-existing settlement hierarchy. The use of sites, however, maybe more
nuanced than rigid site classifications (e.g. village, farm, estate centre, villa,
town) allow for, particularly where occupation spans many centuries. It is
often down to the animal bone analyst to describe the ‘mode of production’ of
a site, and to help define the status of the inhabitants, with respect to
consumption habits. However, often this information is made to fit into a pre-
existing classification of the site, or expected site typology.
This session therefore seeks to explore how reliable this approach is and
whether site classification can be instead defined by the material culture, of
which animal bone is often one of the most abundant resources. If the
expected site classifications are removed do similarities (and differences)
between sites still exist, or are variations in diet, status and animal economy
more comparable based on other criteria such as geology, topography,
climate, or the identities of the inhabitants? This session also seeks to explore
the impact of considering sites as homogenised entities (e.g. producers versus
consumers; high status versus low status; urban versus rural) which often
occurs in geographic or temporal syntheses of animal bone assemblages,
especially where diverse activities or individuals of diverse social, ethnic and
religious identities might be present.
|