Emery, K.F. (2013) Making the Transition from Zooarchaeological Remains to Animals in a Human Context. In Archaeology of Mesoamerican Animals, edited by C. Götz and K. Emery. Pg. 607-630. Lockwood Press, Georgia. (original) (raw)
Related papers
New Perspectives in Zooarchaeology: Researching Animals Beyond Diet
Trowel, Vol. 15, Archaeology Journal of University College Dublin, 2014
This paper introduces some of the invaluable aspects of, and new perspectives arising in, the field of zooarchaeology. Studying archaeological animal remains provides clear evidence of past human diet, but the contributions zooarchaeology can make to archaeological research have a much broader scope. Zooarchaeological research provides an interesting insight into the study of past environments, animal domestication, biostratigraphy, the social side of food, animal remains as clothing or even as building materials and art manifestations, amongst others. Zooarchaeology is subdivided here into environmental or physical zooarchaeology, which mainly deals with climate, seasonality and dating of a site, and social zooarchaeology, which deals with hunting techniques, animal management, social hierarchy and symbolism. This array of possibilities is illustrated through examples drawn from diverse periods and places. Some of the issues concerning zooarchaeology are analysed in more depth through the site of Cueva Negra del Estrecho del Río Quípar (Murcia, Spain). This case study provides a practical application of zooarchaeological perspectives in the study of human evolution. The field of zooarchaeology is therefore not limited to the study of past dietary habits. Rather the study of animal remains allows a deeper understanding of complex human-animal interactions and a greater comprehension of archaeological societies and cultures.
The contributions of animal bones from archaeological sites: the past and future of zooarchaeology
Humans and animals share a universal and intimate relationship that stretches from the earliest appearance of our lineage, through our prehistory, and into history and the modern era. Consequently, zooarchaeologythe analysis of animal remains from archaeological sitestranscends all cultural, temporal, and geographic boundaries, and therefore can be used to address questions spanning the breadth of archaeology. Over the past decades, the field has grown tremendously, from a small group of specialized practitioners to a large sub-discipline that is integrated with the larger field's research directions. Zooarchaeological analyses have addressed questions ranging from forager ecology to the processes of domestication to how animals function in the social realm. In each instance, methodological developments have been crucial in allowing existing questions to be tackled and new questions to be posed. One of the largest changes in zooarchaeology is a shift from considering how the environment has shaped human societies to considering how humans have altered the environment, a process that began deep in our prehistory. Applied zooarchaeology looks towards using zooarchaeological data to address questions relevant to conservation biology, two fields that are becoming increasingly integrated. Standardization of data collection and presentation, open access to these data, and global access remain challenges for the future.
The Oxford Handbook of Zooarchaeology
Oxford Handbooks Online, 2017
This book presents a survey of world archaeology, from the point of view of animal remain studies. It can be considered as a showcase for world zooarchaeology. Forty-eight chapters written by researchers from twenty-five countries discuss archaeological investigations in five different continents. The geographic range covers the Arctic as well as the Tropics, islands and continental land masses, marine shores, forests, hills, and mountains. Human interactions with many different creatures—ranging from mammals to birds, fishes, and molluscs—are discussed, and in a great variety of ecological and cultural contexts. Methodological approaches are also diverse, as they are chosen according to the themes and research questions discussed in individual chapters. The full range of zooarchaeological methods is on display, but also integration with evidence deriving from sister disciplines, such as history, ethnography, zoology, palaeontology, and biochemistry. A methodological glossary helps ...
Zooarchaeology of Northern Mesoamerica has often been restricted to major archaeological sites and few regional syntheses are documented. Based on the original analysis of animal bone remains from ten archaeological assemblages and their confrontation with iconographic, historic and ethnographic data, this paper aims to propose a synthesis on the use of animals in central Mexico, from the Classic period to the Spanish Conquest. We selected sites from a similar environment but two cultural regions: Central Mexico and Western Mexico. The methodology used to compare the results from each assemblage is adapted to a particularly heterogeneous corpus and small-sized samples. The identification of 35 different taxa shows the use of a restricted and rather homogeneous spectrum. However variations are observed considering their proportions in each site. Only two domestic animals are recognised, the dog (Canis familiaris Linnaeus, 1758) and the turkey (Meleagris gallopavo Linnaeus, 1758), but none of the studied societies specialised in the breeding of these species. We then address the cases of hunting or garden-hunting and the exploitation of aquatic animals. Finally, hypotheses are presented about how the animals were used by the populations of Nothern Mesoamerica. Although a larger number of sites need to be studied to enhance the impact of our interpretations, this paper establishes a first attempt at regional synthesis on central Mexico.
in this paper we examine recent zooarchaeological finds from the pre-hispanic northern lowland maya sites of Champotón, Chichén itzá, dzibilchaltun, sihó, Xcambó, and yaxuná using archaeological perspectives combined with ethnohistoric and ethnographic data. in addition to discussing how zooarchaeological data can contribute to the investigation and explanation of archaeological phenomena in the northern maya lowlands, we will focus on two principal themes in this paper. first, we demonstrate how faunal remains from domestic middens can indicate broad patterns of animal consumption at a regional level. second, we analyze how animal bones recovered in apparent ritual contexts appear similar to forms of animal sacrifice and ritual consumption known from Postclassic codices, ethnohistoric sources, and modern day ritual behavior of the rural maya. The combination of zooarchaeological, archaeological, historic, and ethnographic data gives us a deeper understanding of ancient maya civilization.
Integrating zooarchaeology from Pampa and Patagonia
Historic sources have been used as a methodological resource in archaeology since the end of the 19th century in Pampa and Patagonia. Although they have been initially used as a source for testing hypotheses, or as an inductive tool to focus archaeological research, the use of historic records remains one of the basic tools in a number of theoretical schools in contemporary archaeology. There is not, however, a general consensus on how to use them. In this paper, we analyse the historical distributions of some mammals in the southern area of South America, as recorded in 16th century chronicles. We compare them with the evidence provided by contemporary zoogeographical and zooarchaeological studies. In this particular case, we will try to evaluate the potential of using historical sources as a source of testing. Furthermore, we are using some data from historical sources that suggest the exchange of skins of a non-specified taxon among the different ethnographic groups in the Pampa region. The results suggest that the degree of verification of the historical documents is not adequate to be used as a testing tool. Their main importance lies in their potential to generate epistemologically relevant hypotheses and propositions.