Skip to main content

To Be or Not to Be: Global Approaches to Ancient Human Remains

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Archaeological Human Remains

Part of the book series: SpringerBriefs in Archaeology ((BRIEFSARCHAE))

  • 1449 Accesses

Abstract

Ancient human remains have for long been a source of both fascination and contestation. Their appeal is multifaceted and has complex origins. It is based partly on the human enthralment with the issue of mortality. The dead provide learning moments for the living, and it is common to reflect on the self when contemplating the material remains of people from the past. It is not surprising then that in archaeology, the study of human remains is as old as the discipline itself, but this relationship has had chequered histories in different world areas. This is partly due to the diversity of origins of skeletal research in discourses such as anatomy, medicine, racial studies, and evolutionary biology, while in some countries, the influence of non-western traditions of science has also shaped the development of approaches to ancient human remains. As a result of these diverse histories, archaeological human remains have been used as the basis for a range of narratives such as human evolution; tracking ancient diseases; human variation; past migrations; and the reconstruction of past lifestyles. In some settings, human remains have provided the basis for politically motivated narratives of ethnogenesis, while in other countries, self-conscious attempts to characterize the nation as modern and civilized have produced a selective blindness to remains associated with the local past. Similarly, the appropriateness or otherwise of the retrieval, analysis, and long-term curation of human remains has provoked controversy in some world areas but not in others, while in some contexts, forensic approaches have emerged as an important element in conflict resolution. Institutions such as national museums and universities have played central roles in the development of research into archaeological human bone. The diversity in terminology—physical anthropology, biological anthropology, skeletal biology, osteology, bioarchaeology, human osteoarchaeology—reflects the distinctive histories of research into archaeological human remains: there are many bioarchaeologies.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Brickley, Megan, and J.I. McKinley. 2004. Guidelines to the Standards for Recording Human Remains. IFA Paper No. 7. Southampton: BABAO and Institute of Field Archaeologists.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buikstra, Jane E., and Charlotte A. Roberts. 2012. The global history of paleopathology: Pioneers and prospects. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buikstra, Jane E., and Douglas, H. Ubelaker. 1994. Standards for data collection from human skeletal remains. Arkansas Archeological Survey Research Series No. 44. Fayetteville: Arkansas Archaeological Society.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark, John Grahame Douglas. 1972. Starr Carr: A case study in bioarchaeology. London: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, Mark Nathan, and George J. Armelagos. 1984. Paleopathology at the origins of agriculture. New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Márquez-Grant, Nicholas, and Linda Fibiger. 2011. The Routledge handbook of archaeological human remains and legislation: An international guide to laws and practice in the excavation and treatment of archaeological human remains. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mays, Simon, Megan Brickley, and N. Dodwell. 2002. Human bones from archaeological sites: Guidelines for producing assessment documents and analytical reports. Swindon: English Heritage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, Charlotte A. 2006. A view from afar: Bioarchaeology in Britain. In Bioarchaeology: The contextual analysis of human remains, ed. Jane E. Buikstra, and Lane A. Beck, 417–439. Amsterdam: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sofaer Derevenski, Joanna R. 2001. Is human osteoarchaeology environmental archaeology? In Environmental archaeology: Meaning and purpose, ed. Umberto Albarella, 113–133. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sofaer, Joanna R. 2006. The body as material culture: A theoretical osteoarchaeology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stocking, George W. 1987. Victorian anthropology. New York: The Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Barra O’Donnabhain .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

O’Donnabhain, B., Lozada, M.C. (2014). To Be or Not to Be: Global Approaches to Ancient Human Remains. In: O’Donnabhain, B., Lozada, M. (eds) Archaeological Human Remains. SpringerBriefs in Archaeology. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-06370-6_1

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics