 |
 |
In Jennifer Thomas' message, which sparked the interesting group of messages on nomenclature, I noticed a humorous (?) reference to the possible problems of working with specialists. Has anyone any comments to make on the problems - or benefits - of involving specialists in the analysis of environmental data ? I am particularly interested in the question as it applies to bones, and whether mammal, bird, fish etc bones from an assemblage should be analysed separately by specialists, or whether you think every osteoarchaeologist should be able to deal with most assemblages adequately, sending only particularly problematical or important specimens off to specialists ? Apart from questions of nomenclature, are there other areas which could give rise to problems when integrating zooarchaeological data from separate workers on one assemblage ? Thanks Will Higgs Grad Student, Zooarchaeology University of York %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%