The classic example must surely be Brain's re-interpretation of Ardrey's The Hunting Hypothesis about early Man in Africa.
These are the early papers.
Brain, C. K. 1967. Hottentot food remains and their bearing on the interpretation of fossil bone assemblages. Scientific Papers of the Namib Desert Research Station, 32, 1-7.
Brain, C. K. 1969. The contribution of Namib desert Hottentots to an understanding of Australopithecine bone accumulations. Scientific Papers of the Namib Desert Research Station, 39, 13-22.
There is also Brain's later book.
Dale Serjeantson
Archaeology
School of Humanities
University of Southampton
Highfield
Southampton SO17 1BJ
http://www.southampton.ac.uk/archaeology/about/staff/dale.page
Birds and Archaeology: New Research. International Journal of Osteoarchaeology Special Issue
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/oa.v24.3/issuetoc
From: zooarch <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> on behalf of Flint Dibble <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
Reply-To: Flint Dibble <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
Date: Wednesday, 2 December 2015 18:53
To: zooarch <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
Subject: Re: [ZOOARCH] Taphonomy and changes in assemblage interpretation
Hi Kathy,
One example of an article where a reconsideration of taphonomy led to new interpretations: Marean and Frey 1997. "Animal Bones from Caves to Cities: Reverse Utility Curves as Methodological Artifacts." American Antiquity
This is a topic that interests me greatly b/c I am currently writing up a reinterpretation of the faunal assemblage from Bronze Age and Iron Age Nichoria in Greece where the taphonomic history is causing me to reinterpret the initial results. So, please share any other suggestions you receive!
Thanks,
Flint
On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 9:30 AM, Katheryn Twiss <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
Hi:
Thank you! No particular region or time period at this stage, although she's eventually intending to work on Malagasy material.
As of right now, I've got the Dart/Brain; Behrensmeyer, etc.., on hunting vs. scavenging; and Binford’s Bones.
I also have (thank you, ZOOARCH, for all of this!) Rich Madgwick's recent work on UK taphonomy, Marean & Kim on Kobeh Cave, and a referral to Enghoff's "Viking Age fishing in Denmark..." Everyone, please let me know if you'd like me to pass anything along?
These will all be relevant-- and I'm thoroughly enjoying hearing what people recommend.
I deeply appreciate the email, and the advice!
Best,
Kathy
Madgwick, R. In Press. New light on feasting and deposition: Exploring accumulation history through taphonomic analysis at later prehistoric middens in Britain. Archaeological and Anthropological Sciences.
Madgwick, R., Mulville, J. 2015. Reconstructing depositional histories through bone taphonomy: Extending the potential of faunal data.Journal of Archaeological Science 53: 255-263.
Madgwick, R. 2010. Bone modification and the conceptual relationship between humans and animals in Iron Age Wessex. In J. Morris, M. Maltby (eds.) Integrating Social and Environmental Archaeologies: Reconsidering Deposition. B.A.R. International Series 2077. pp. 66-82. Oxford: Archaeopress.
Enghoff, Inge Bødker. "Viking Age fishing in Denmark, with a particular focus on the freshwater site Viborg, methods of excavation and smelt fishing." Viking Age fishing in Denmark, with a particular focus on the freshwater site Viborg, methods of excavation and smelt fishing (2005): 69-76.
On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 9:19 AM, Madrigal, Cregg <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
Kathy,
The book that really got modern taphonomic analysis going was C.K. Brain’s The Hunters or the Hunted on the South African australopithecine sites. There’s also all the work in the 1980s and 1990s on the hunting vs. scavenging debate in African paleoanthropology – especially at the FLK Zinj site. See the works by Kay Behrensmeyer, Robert Blumenschine, Henry Bunn, and many others, including Binford’s Bones book.
Are you interested in any particular region or time period?
Cregg
T. Cregg Madrigal, Ph.D.
Environmental Specialist 3 – Archaeology
New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection
Municipal Finance and Construction Element
Mail Code 401-03D
PO Box 420
Trenton, NJ 08625-0420
609-633-1170<tel:609-633-1170>
[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
From: Analysis of animal remains from archaeological sites [mailto:[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>] On Behalf Of Katheryn Twiss
Sent: Wednesday, December 02, 2015 4:34 AM
To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
Subject: [ZOOARCH] Taphonomy and changes in assemblage interpretation
Dear All:
I have a student looking for faunal assemblages whose interpretation changed significantly once researchers began to consider their taphonomic histories.
Does anyone have any recommendations re interesting examples, please?
Thank you, all! I appreciate any thoughts you might have!
Best,
Kathy
--
Katheryn C. Twiss
Associate Professor
Stony Brook University
Stony Brook, NY 11794-4364
[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
--
Katheryn C. Twiss
Associate Professor
Stony Brook University
Stony Brook, NY 11794-4364
[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
|