Taphonomy Case Study

1708 Words4 Pages

TAPHONOMIC STUDIES Studying taphonomy and site formation processes has really revolutionized the way archaeologists are able to reconstruct the past. A specific interest in taphonomy has led to an increase in preservation and interpretation of the archaeological record (Rick et al., 2006). Rick and colleagues (2006) examined taphonomy and site formation on California’s Channel Islands, a site inhabited by humans for over 12,000 calendar years. California’s Channel Islands contains thousands of archaeological sites with dense shell middens and villages to lithic camps (Rick et al., 2006). Unfortunately, archaeologists working on the Channel Islands have paid very little attention to the effects of taphonomy, which only further illustrates …show more content…

Most of the research has been done in Eastern and Southern African over the last several decades, revealing several classes of evidence: hominid fossils (includes extinct and modern humans), archaeological sites consisting of ancient stone tools and fossil animal bones, and geological and paleoecological contexts (Bunn, 1991). This research prompted other researchers in South Africa to reevaluate the fossil evidence by analyzing the processes that affect bones between the time they are buried and when they are discovered, most notably was C.K. Brain. Brian brought the studies of taphonomy into paleoanthropology during the 1960s, bringing about more awareness of the interaction between cultural and natural processes that affect bone assemblages. Brain, through taphonomic analysis, discovered more about how ancient hominids died than how they lived (Bunn, 1991). Some archaeological evidence discovered, such as stone artifacts, bone tools, and burned bones, provides more comprehensive evidence of hominid …show more content…

As with archaeology, forensic anthropologists need to study existing taphonomic models in order to better understand how it can be applied to the field of forensic anthropology.
Although the context of the remains are different (archaeological vs. forensic), the excavation techniques are analogous. In both cases, the researcher needs to reconstruct the activities at a site, the location of those activities and their sequence (Scott & Connor, 2006). The strongest paradigm that anthropologists/archaeologists work within is that human behavior is patterned and therefore the artifacts that are left as a result of human behavior, are also patterned (Scott & Connor, 2006). Taphonomy has transitioned to extend beyond just human behavior to link biological, chemical and geological

Open Document