A most interesting discussion! I am quite surprised to find how much I agree with many of the choices.
I think the way forward now is to ask our colleagues in other fields of archaeology for their nominations. We will probably find them depressingly out of date.
Dale
Dale Serjeantson
Archaeology
School of Humanities
University of Southampton
http://www.southampton.ac.uk/archaeology/profiles/serjeantson.html
________________________________________
From: Analysis of animal remains from archaeological sites [[log in to unmask]] on behalf of Naomi Sykes [[log in to unmask]]
Sent: 13 September 2012 10:45
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [ZOOARCH] An opportunity for self-congratulation
Excellent point about the French tradition of integration - it's an embarrassing fact that many of us in the UK are only now starting to reinvent what Poplin achieved decades ago.
Vive la France!
________________________________________
From: Analysis of animal remains from archaeological sites [[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of David Orton [[log in to unmask]]
Sent: 13 September 2012 10:36
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [ZOOARCH] An opportunity for self-congratulation
Can I nominate the entire French tradition of zooarchaeology?
From the admittedly fairly limited amount of literature that I've read
the French seem to be doing a better job than most of us of integrating
zooarchaeology with the rest of the discipline.
Also, a few people have mentioned Barrett et al's 2008 JAS paper on
isotope provenancing. In the interests of full disclosure I now work on
the provenancing project, but I'd actually be more inclined to nominate
James' twin papers with Alison Locker and Callum Roberts back in 2004.
Barrett, J.H., Locker, A.M., Roberts, C.M., 2004a. ‘Dark Age Economics’
revisited: the English fish bone evidence AD 600-1600. Antiquity 78,
618-636.
Barrett, J.H., Locker, A.M., Roberts, C.M., 2004b. The origin of intensive
marine fishing in medieval Europe: the English evidence. Proceedings of
the Royal Society B 271, 2417-2421
It's traditional macro (rather than molecular) zooarchaeology, but with
massively important implications that are brought out well in the
discussion.
Finally, I'd second the nominations that have already been made for
Zeder's 'Feeding Cities' and Mark Maltby's Exeter study. Yes, a bit of a
provisioning theme developing here...
Best,
David
> Dear all,
>
> I'm contemplating our profession and I would like to canvass opinion...
>
> What articles, paper etc spring to your mind as examples that show zooarchaeologists to be at the forefront of mainstream archaeological research, rather than acting as supporting 'specialists'?
>
> I suppose I'm asking for examples, from anywhere in the world and relating to any period, of papers/articles that make you feel proud to be a zooarchaeologist.
>
> The only rule to my query is that you can not vote for yourself - it goes without saying that we are, of course, all doing great things!
>
> I'll kick-off by suggesting Legge and Rowley-Conwy's (1988) Star Carr Revisited.
>
> Any other suggestions?
>
> Thanks is advance,
>
> Naomi
>
> ----------------
> Naomi Sykes
> Lecturer in Archaeology
> Department of Archaeology
> University of Nottingham
> NG7 2RD
>
> This message and any attachment are intended solely for the addressee and may contain confidential information. If you have received this message in error, please send it back to me, and immediately delete it. Please do not use, copy or disclose the information contained in this message or in any attachment. Any views or opinions expressed by the author of this email do not necessarily reflect the views of the University of Nottingham.
>
> This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an attachment
> may still contain software viruses which could damage your computer system:
> you are advised to perform your own checks. Email communications with the
> University of Nottingham may be monitored as permitted by UK legislation.
|