Chapter 1: Introduction to TephroArchaeology

TephroArchaeology in the North Pacific, Archaeopress, 2019

Magma is basically molten rock from which minerals crystallize in order over time. A magma body may also be mixed, with different sources supplying magmas of different chemical compositions. These compositions are defined by their silica contents (Figure B-1) 2 . -1 (section 1, column 3) lists averaged percentages of the main elements comprising magma. These compositions are presented as oxides (combined with oxygen) in -1 for different magmas categorized by silica content. The designations 'mafic, intermediate, and felsic' rocks correspond to silica ranges from 45 to 75% in content. Greater than 75% silica forms glass.

Yearbook of Biological Anthropology, 2022

Buikstra, J.E., DeWitte, S.N., Agarwal, S.C., Baker, B.J., Bartelink, E.J., Berger, E., Blevins, K.E., Bolhofner, K., Boutin, A.T., Brickley, M.B., Buzon, M.R., de la Cova, C., Goldstein, L., Grauer, A.L., Gregoricka, L.A., Halcrow, S.E., Hall, S.A., Hillson, S., Kakaliouris, A.M., Klaus, H.D., Knudson, K.J., Knüsel, C.J., Larsen, C.S., Martin, D.L., Milner, G.R., Novak, M., Nystrom, K.C., Pacheco-Forés, S.I., Prowse, T.L., Robbins Schug, G., Roberts, C.A., Rothwell, J.E., Santos, A. L., Stojanowski, C., Stone, A.C., Stull, K.E., Temple, D.H., Torres, C.M., Toyne, J. M., Tung, T.A., Ullinger, J., Wiltschke-Schrotta, K., and Zakrzewski, S.R. In press. 21st century bioarchaeology: Taking stock and moving forward. Yearbook of Biological Anthropology. This article presents outcomes from a Workshop entitled “Bioarchaeology: Taking Stock and Moving Forward,” which was held at Arizona State University (ASU) on March 6–8, 2020. Funded by the National Science Foundation (NSF), the School of Human Evolution and Social Change (ASU), and the Center for Bioarchaeological Research (CBR, ASU), the Workshop's overall goal was to explore reasons why research proposals submitted by bioarchaeologists, both graduate students and established scholars, fared disproportionately poorly within recent NSF Anthropology Program competitions and to offer advice for increasing success. Therefore, this Workshop comprised 43 international scholars and four advanced graduate students with a history of successful grant acquisition, primarily from the United States. Ulti- mately, we focused on two related aims: (1) best practices for improving research designs and training and (2) evaluating topics of contemporary significance that rever- berate through history and beyond as promising trajectories for bioarchaeological research. Among the former were contextual grounding, research question/hypothesis generation, statistical procedures appropriate for small samples and mixed qualitative/ quantitative data, the salience of Bayesian methods, and training program content. Top- ical foci included ethics, social inequality, identity (including intersectionality), climate change, migration, violence, epidemic disease, adaptability/plasticity, the osteological paradox, and the developmental origins of health and disease. Given the profound changes required globally to address decolonization in the 21st century, this concern also entered many formal and informal discussions.

Evolutionary Anthropology, 1999

the word 'tephra', derived from a Greek word for ash, is a collective term/or all the unconsolidated, primary pyroclastic products 0f a volcanic eruplion. We summarise here (in English) the meanings and applicability 0f this and related terms, including tephrostratigraphy. tephrochronology, tephrochrono stratigraphy, lephrology, and cryptotephra. These and other tephra-based terms, some of which are erroneous or unnecessary, have been used in a wide range of stratigraphic and palaeoenvironmental disciplines and in archaeology.

Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 26 (2007) 486–515

2016

Abstract: is paper discusses the history and current status of the field of bioarchaeology

Bulletins et mémoires de la Société d'anthropologie de Paris, 2010

When one reads archaeological publications on funerary remains, one might think that the deceased was sacrificed to accompany the burial of a pot [34]. One could easily blame archaeologists for this predicament, but it also has its roots in a research tradition within biological anthropology that tends to provide biological data to the archaeologist who provides the social and cultural meaning. Due to empirical divergence this approach encourages archaeologists and anthropologists tend to address parallel rather than synthetic questions. Burials are often only used to develop a notion of time-successive funerary traditions that support a chronological framework. This means that the event represented in the burial is left underdeveloped or erroneously identified as a tradition. Bioarchaeology addresses archaeological questions through a contextual approach combining the biological identity of the deceased with their cultural and archaeological context. It therefore aims to synthesise the biological and cultural aspects of the funerary record to address archaeological questions and better place burials in their cultural, social, and political context. The goal of this treatment is to introduce bioarchaeology, its origin and purpose, and to attempt to place such studies within French archaeological and anthropological scholarship. Keywords Bioarchaeology • Funerary archaeology • Archeothanatologie • Biocultural approach Mots clés Bioarchéologie • Archéologie funéraire • Archéothanatologie • Approche bioculturelle Bioarchaeology: definitions and disciplinary origins Since J.G.D. Clark's (Sir John Grahame Douglas Clark) first application of the term 'bioarchaeology' to archaeozoology (the study of animal remains from archaeological sites), in Star Carr: a Case Study in Bioarchaeology, published in 1972, the term has taken on a variety of definitions. In Britain, it is now generally applied to the study of biological remains (biota) from archaeological sites. This includes the fields of archaeozoology (zooarchaeology), archaeobotany (palaeoethnobotany), and the study of human remains from archaeological sites (human osteoarchaeology). Clark's intention was to encourage an inter-disciplinary science that came to be environmental archaeology [1], or perhaps

2001

the word 'Iephra', derivedfrom a Greek word/or ash, is a collective term/or all the unconsolidated, primary pyroclastic products 0/a volcanic eruplion. We summarise here (in English) the meanings and applicability 0/this and related terms, including tephrostratigraphy. tephrochronology, tephrochrol1ol71etl:v, lephrology, and cryptotephra. These and other tephra-based terms, some 0/which are erroneous or unnecessQlY, have been used in a wide range o/stratigraphic and palaeoenvironmental disciplines and in archaeology.

Geoarchaeology uses the techniques, methods, and concepts of the physical sciences to address archaeological questions. Examined here are the major techniques of geoarchaeology that are geared toward: discovering archaeological sites and documenting their internal structure; surveying site formation and disturbance processes; the analysis of soils and sediments; paleoenvironmental reconstruction and the impact of humans on the landscape; the physical analysis of archaeological materials; and the integration of geoarchaeology with social archaeology. Geoarchaeology must be integrated into research programs at the design, excavation, and analytical stages to be most advantageous.

Antiquity, 2011

The full-text may be used and/or reproduced, and given to third parties in any format or medium, without prior permission or charge, for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-prot purposes provided that: • a full bibliographic reference is made to the original source • a link is made to the metadata record in DRO • the full-text is not changed in any way The full-text must not be sold in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders.