Osteobiographies: Multidisciplinary contributions to the study of human remains
Bioarchaeology has proven to be a discipline that provides valuable information about the lifestyles of human populations from the study of bone and dental remains, tissues that record the situations experienced. The bioarchaeological study provides unique evidence that contributes to the understand...
Guardado en:
| Autores principales: | , , |
|---|---|
| Formato: | Artículo revista |
| Lenguaje: | Español |
| Publicado: |
Facultad de Filosofía y Humanidades. Museo de Antropología
2020
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | https://revistas.unc.edu.ar/index.php/antropologia/article/view/31076 |
| Aporte de: |
| id |
I10-R10-article-31076 |
|---|---|
| record_format |
ojs |
| institution |
Universidad Nacional de Córdoba |
| institution_str |
I-10 |
| repository_str |
R-10 |
| container_title_str |
Revistas de la UNC |
| language |
Español |
| format |
Artículo revista |
| topic |
Osteobiografías Bioarqueología Argentina Chile Holoceno Medio Holoceno tardio Bioarqueología Osteobiographies Bioarchaeology Argentina Chile Middle Holocene Late Holocene Bioarchaeology Osteobiografías Bioaqrueología Argentina Chile Holoceno Medio Holoceno Tardío Bioarqueología |
| spellingShingle |
Osteobiografías Bioarqueología Argentina Chile Holoceno Medio Holoceno tardio Bioarqueología Osteobiographies Bioarchaeology Argentina Chile Middle Holocene Late Holocene Bioarchaeology Osteobiografías Bioaqrueología Argentina Chile Holoceno Medio Holoceno Tardío Bioarqueología Fabra, Mariana Salega, Soledad Cortés, Leticia I. Osteobiographies: Multidisciplinary contributions to the study of human remains |
| topic_facet |
Osteobiografías Bioarqueología Argentina Chile Holoceno Medio Holoceno tardio Bioarqueología Osteobiographies Bioarchaeology Argentina Chile Middle Holocene Late Holocene Bioarchaeology Osteobiografías Bioaqrueología Argentina Chile Holoceno Medio Holoceno Tardío Bioarqueología |
| author |
Fabra, Mariana Salega, Soledad Cortés, Leticia I. |
| author_facet |
Fabra, Mariana Salega, Soledad Cortés, Leticia I. |
| author_sort |
Fabra, Mariana |
| title |
Osteobiographies: Multidisciplinary contributions to the study of human remains |
| title_short |
Osteobiographies: Multidisciplinary contributions to the study of human remains |
| title_full |
Osteobiographies: Multidisciplinary contributions to the study of human remains |
| title_fullStr |
Osteobiographies: Multidisciplinary contributions to the study of human remains |
| title_full_unstemmed |
Osteobiographies: Multidisciplinary contributions to the study of human remains |
| title_sort |
osteobiographies: multidisciplinary contributions to the study of human remains |
| description |
Bioarchaeology has proven to be a discipline that provides valuable information about the lifestyles of human populations from the study of bone and dental remains, tissues that record the situations experienced. The bioarchaeological study provides unique evidence that contributes to the understanding of problems that are fundamental to the knowledge of the past such as work and subsistence, health and disease, diet and nutrition, sedentary lifestyle, the adoption of cultigens and the domestication of animals, inter-ethnic contact, social conflict and European colonization, among others. More recently, and hand in hand with Social Theory, bioarchaeology has expanded its scope to other aspects, for example, considering social relationships as part of the formation of the biological body (Sofaer, 2006). These new approaches formulated the need to consider the physical body as socially created (Lorber and Martin, 2011), being a real and symbolic vehicle of political and social identities (Knudson and Stojanowski, 2008).
In its origins, the term “osteobiography” was coined to refer to the compilation of all the information available from the analysis of a skeleton that makes it possible to narrate the life of an individual (Saul, 1972). Currently, osteobiography has established itself as a specific analysis framework within a humanistic bioarcheology, which promotes the study of “biography as a cultural narrative” based on human remains (Robb, 2002, p. 160). This perspective raises and responds to different types of research questions from those addressed by traditional quantitative bioarcheology, focused at the population level, both being independent and complementary analysis frameworks (Hosek and Robb, 2019, p. 2). This diversity of current perspectives has been called “the bioarchaeologies” of the 21st century (Buikstra and Beck, 2006) and they recognize its bases in social biology (Angel, 1946), the biocultural proposal (Blackely, 1977; Goodman and Leatherman, 1998) and the osteobiography of Frank Saul (1972).
Various proposals that consider individuals in their historical and cultural dimension allow us to think in a new way about the bioindicators that are registered to reconstruct the identities of the subjects from integrated perspectives. Examples of these are the theory of the three bodies -physical, social and political- (Scheper-Hugues and Lock, 1987) and the theory of life courses (Gilchrist, 2004). In this sense, the bioarcheology of individuals (Stodder and Palkovich, 2012) or of the personality (Boutin, 2011), stands as valid alternatives that allow not only to humanize the past, but also to address problems generally not considered in bioarchaeological studies. traditional traditions, such as gender and sex, age and life courses, human body and identity, social roles, disability, the concept of embodiment and even the post-mortem agency of human remains (Hosek and Robb, 2019). In this way, they contribute to the generation of multivocal readings about the past.
All these perspectives are inserted in the need to problematize bodies, an aspect to which both archeology and anthropology have contributed significantly. From different avenues of analysis, researchers have argued that bodies are at the same time biology and culture, overcoming that position that sees them as a natural and pre-social entity on which cultural meanings are imprinted (Knapp and Meskell, 1997; Ingold, 2000; Fowler, 2002; Hamilakis et al., 2002; Thomas, 2007).
This dossier brings together five of the seventeen works presented in the homonymous symposium developed within the framework of the XX National Congress of Argentine Archeology, from July 15 to 19, 2019 in the city of Córdoba, under the coordination of Mariana Fabra and Soledad Salega, and the report of Leticia Cortés.
The main objective of this symposium was to socialize and reflect on bioarchaeological research carried out from an osteobiographical perspective that recounted unique life stories from the study of human remains. This space made it possible to debate, based on specific case studies, the generation of knowledge about the lives of people, historically and culturally situated. |
| publisher |
Facultad de Filosofía y Humanidades. Museo de Antropología |
| publishDate |
2020 |
| url |
https://revistas.unc.edu.ar/index.php/antropologia/article/view/31076 |
| work_keys_str_mv |
AT fabramariana osteobiographiesmultidisciplinarycontributionstothestudyofhumanremains AT salegasoledad osteobiographiesmultidisciplinarycontributionstothestudyofhumanremains AT cortesleticiai osteobiographiesmultidisciplinarycontributionstothestudyofhumanremains AT fabramariana osteobiografiasaportesmultidisciplinariosparaelestudioderestoshumanos AT salegasoledad osteobiografiasaportesmultidisciplinariosparaelestudioderestoshumanos AT cortesleticiai osteobiografiasaportesmultidisciplinariosparaelestudioderestoshumanos AT fabramariana osteobiografiascontribuicoesmultidisciplinaresparaoestudoderestosmortaishumanos AT salegasoledad osteobiografiascontribuicoesmultidisciplinaresparaoestudoderestosmortaishumanos AT cortesleticiai osteobiografiascontribuicoesmultidisciplinaresparaoestudoderestosmortaishumanos |
| first_indexed |
2022-08-20T01:12:30Z |
| last_indexed |
2022-08-20T01:12:30Z |
| _version_ |
1770717882700791808 |
| spelling |
I10-R10-article-310762021-06-18T17:30:37Z Osteobiographies: Multidisciplinary contributions to the study of human remains Osteobiografías: Aportes multidisciplinarios para el estudio de restos humanos Osteobiografias: contribuições multidisciplinares para o estudo de restos mortais humanos Fabra, Mariana Salega, Soledad Cortés, Leticia I. Osteobiografías Bioarqueología Argentina Chile Holoceno Medio Holoceno tardio Bioarqueología Osteobiographies Bioarchaeology Argentina Chile Middle Holocene Late Holocene Bioarchaeology Osteobiografías Bioaqrueología Argentina Chile Holoceno Medio Holoceno Tardío Bioarqueología Bioarchaeology has proven to be a discipline that provides valuable information about the lifestyles of human populations from the study of bone and dental remains, tissues that record the situations experienced. The bioarchaeological study provides unique evidence that contributes to the understanding of problems that are fundamental to the knowledge of the past such as work and subsistence, health and disease, diet and nutrition, sedentary lifestyle, the adoption of cultigens and the domestication of animals, inter-ethnic contact, social conflict and European colonization, among others. More recently, and hand in hand with Social Theory, bioarchaeology has expanded its scope to other aspects, for example, considering social relationships as part of the formation of the biological body (Sofaer, 2006). These new approaches formulated the need to consider the physical body as socially created (Lorber and Martin, 2011), being a real and symbolic vehicle of political and social identities (Knudson and Stojanowski, 2008). In its origins, the term “osteobiography” was coined to refer to the compilation of all the information available from the analysis of a skeleton that makes it possible to narrate the life of an individual (Saul, 1972). Currently, osteobiography has established itself as a specific analysis framework within a humanistic bioarcheology, which promotes the study of “biography as a cultural narrative” based on human remains (Robb, 2002, p. 160). This perspective raises and responds to different types of research questions from those addressed by traditional quantitative bioarcheology, focused at the population level, both being independent and complementary analysis frameworks (Hosek and Robb, 2019, p. 2). This diversity of current perspectives has been called “the bioarchaeologies” of the 21st century (Buikstra and Beck, 2006) and they recognize its bases in social biology (Angel, 1946), the biocultural proposal (Blackely, 1977; Goodman and Leatherman, 1998) and the osteobiography of Frank Saul (1972). Various proposals that consider individuals in their historical and cultural dimension allow us to think in a new way about the bioindicators that are registered to reconstruct the identities of the subjects from integrated perspectives. Examples of these are the theory of the three bodies -physical, social and political- (Scheper-Hugues and Lock, 1987) and the theory of life courses (Gilchrist, 2004). In this sense, the bioarcheology of individuals (Stodder and Palkovich, 2012) or of the personality (Boutin, 2011), stands as valid alternatives that allow not only to humanize the past, but also to address problems generally not considered in bioarchaeological studies. traditional traditions, such as gender and sex, age and life courses, human body and identity, social roles, disability, the concept of embodiment and even the post-mortem agency of human remains (Hosek and Robb, 2019). In this way, they contribute to the generation of multivocal readings about the past. All these perspectives are inserted in the need to problematize bodies, an aspect to which both archeology and anthropology have contributed significantly. From different avenues of analysis, researchers have argued that bodies are at the same time biology and culture, overcoming that position that sees them as a natural and pre-social entity on which cultural meanings are imprinted (Knapp and Meskell, 1997; Ingold, 2000; Fowler, 2002; Hamilakis et al., 2002; Thomas, 2007). This dossier brings together five of the seventeen works presented in the homonymous symposium developed within the framework of the XX National Congress of Argentine Archeology, from July 15 to 19, 2019 in the city of Córdoba, under the coordination of Mariana Fabra and Soledad Salega, and the report of Leticia Cortés. The main objective of this symposium was to socialize and reflect on bioarchaeological research carried out from an osteobiographical perspective that recounted unique life stories from the study of human remains. This space made it possible to debate, based on specific case studies, the generation of knowledge about the lives of people, historically and culturally situated. La Bioarqueología ha demostrado ser una disciplina que brinda valiosa información acerca de los estilos de vida de las poblaciones humanas a partir del estudio de restos óseos y dentales, tejidos que guardan registro de las situaciones vividas. El estudio bioarqueológico provee evidencia única que aporta a la comprensión de problemáticas que son fundamentales al conocimiento del pasado tales como el trabajo y la subsistencia, la salud y la enfermedad, la dieta y nutrición, el sedentarismo, la adopción de cultígenos y la domesticación de animales, el contacto interétnico, el conflicto social y la colonización europea, entre otras. Más recientemente, y de la mano de la Teoría Social, la bioarqueología ha expandido su alcance a otros aspectos, por ejemplo, considerar a las relaciones sociales como parte de la formacion del cuerpo biológico (Sofaer, 2006). Estas nuevas aproximaciones formularon la necesidad de considerar al cuerpo físico como socialmente creado (Lorber y Martin, 2011), siendo vehículo real y simbólico de identidades políticas y sociales (Knudson y Stojanowski, 2008). En sus orígenes, el término “osteobiografía” fue acuñado para hacer referencia a la recopilación de toda la información disponible a partir del análisis de un esqueleto que posibilita narrar la vida de un individuo (Saul, 1972). Actualmente, la osteobiografía se ha consolidado como un marco de análisis específico dentro de una bioarqueología humanista, que promueve el estudio de la “biografía como una narrativa cultural” a partir de los restos humanos (Robb, 2002, p. 160). Esta perspectiva plantea y responde a diferentes tipos de preguntas de investigación de aquellas abordadas por la bioarqueología cuantitativa tradicional, enfocada a nivel poblacional, siendo ambos marcos de análisis independientes y a la vez complementarios (Hosek y Robb, 2019, p. 2). Esta diversidad de perspectivas actuales han sido denominadas “las bioarqueologías” del siglo XXI (Buikstra y Beck, 2006) y reconocen sus bases en la biología social (Angel, 1946), la propuesta biocultural (Blackely, 1977; Goodman y Leatherman, 1998) y la osteobiografía de Frank Saul (1972). Diversas propuestas que consideran a los individuos en su dimensión histórica y cultural nos permiten pensar de un modo novedoso los bioindicadores que se registran para reconstruir las identidades de los sujetos desde perspectivas integradas. Ejemplo de ellas son la teoría de los tres cuerpos -físico, social y político- (Scheper-Hugues y Lock, 1987) y la teoría de los cursos de vida (Gilchrist, 2004). En este sentido, la bioarqueología de los individuos (Stodder y Palkovich, 2012) o de la personalidad (Boutin, 2011), se erigen como alternativas válidas que permiten no sólo humanizar el pasado, sino también abordar problemáticas generalmente no consideradas en los estudios bioarqueológicos tradicionales, tales como género y sexo, edad y cursos de vida, cuerpo humano e identidad, roles sociales, discapacidad, el concepto de embodiment e incluso la agencia post-mortem de los restos humanos (Hosek y Robb, 2019). De esta manera, contribuyen a la generación de lecturas multivocales sobre el pasado. Todas estas perspectivas se insertan en la necesidad de problematizar los cuerpos, aspecto sobre el que tanto la arqueología como la antropología han aportado de manera significativa. Desde distintas vías de análisis, investigadores e investigadoras han sostenido que los cuerpos son al mismo tiempo biología y cultura, superando aquella postura que ve a éstos como una entidad natural y presocial sobre la cual se imprimen significados culturales (Knapp y Meskell, 1997; Ingold, 2000; Fowler, 2002; Hamilakis et al., 2002; Thomas, 2007). Este dossier reúne cinco de los diecisiete trabajos presentados en el simposio homónimo desarrollado en el marco del XX Congreso Nacional de Arqueología Argentina, durante los días 15 al 19 de julio de 2019 en la ciudad de Córdoba, bajo la coordinación de Mariana Fabra y Soledad Salega, y la relatoría de Leticia Cortés. Dicho simposio tuvo como objetivo principal socializar y reflexionar acerca de las investigaciones bioarqueológicas llevadas a cabo desde una perspectiva osteobiográfica que relataran historias de vida singulares a partir del estudio de restos humanos. Este espacio permitió debatir, a partir de casos de estudio concretos, la generación de conocimiento sobre la vida de personas, histórica y culturalmente situadas. A Bioarqueologia tem se mostrado uma disciplina que fornece informações valiosas sobre os estilos de vida das populações humanas a partir do estudo dos restos ósseos e dentários, tecidos que registram as situações vividas. O estudo bioarqueológico fornece evidências únicas que contribuem para a compreensão de problemas fundamentais para o conhecimento do passado como trabalho e subsistência, saúde e doença, alimentação e nutrição, sedentarismo, adoção de cultivos e domesticação de animais, contato interétnico, conflito social e colonização europeia, entre outros. Mais recentemente, e lado a lado com a Teoria Social, a bioarqueologia ampliou seu escopo para outros aspectos, por exemplo, considerando as relações sociais como parte da formação do corpo biológico (Sofaer, 2006). Essas novas abordagens formularam a necessidade de se considerar o corpo físico como criado socialmente (Lorber e Martin, 2011), sendo um veículo real e simbólico de identidades políticas e sociais (Knudson e Stojanowski, 2008). Nas suas origens, o termo “osteobiografia” foi cunhado para designar a compilação de todas as informações disponíveis a partir da análise de um esqueleto que possibilita narrar a vida de um indivíduo (Saul, 1972). Atualmente, a osteobiografia tem se estabelecido como um quadro específico de análise em uma bioarqueologia humanística, que promove o estudo da “biografia como narrativa cultural” a partir de restos humanos (Robb, 2002, p. 160). Essa perspectiva levanta e responde a diferentes categorias de questões de pesquisa daquelas abordadas pela bioarqueologia quantitativa tradicional, com foco no nível populacional, sendo ambas estruturas de análise independentes e complementares (Hosek e Robb, 2019, p. 2). Essa diversidade de perspectivas atuais tem sido chamada de “as bioarqueologias” do século XXI (Buikstra e Beck, 2006) e reconhecem suas bases na biologia social (Angel, 1946), a proposta biocultural (Blackely, 1977; Goodman e Leatherman, 1998) e a osteobiografia de Frank Saul (1972). Várias propostas que consideram os indivíduos em sua dimensão histórica e cultural nos permitem pensar de uma nova forma sobre os bioindicadores que se cadastram para reconstruir as identidades dos sujeitos a partir de perspectivas integradas. Exemplos disso são a teoria dos três corpos -físico, social e político- (Scheper-Hugues e Lock, 1987) e a teoria dos cursos de vida (Gilchrist, 2004). Nesse sentido, a bioarqueologia dos indivíduos (Stodder e Palkovich, 2012) ou da personalidade (Boutin, 2011), apresentam-se como válidas que permitem não só humanizar o passado, mas também abordar problemas geralmente não considerados nos estudos bioarqueológicos. Temas tradicionais, como gênero e sexo, idade e trajetória de vida, corpo humano e identidade, papéis sociais, deficiência, o conceito de incorporação e até mesmo a agência post mortem de restos humanos (Hosek e Robb, 2019). Dessa forma, contribuem para a geração de leituras multivocais sobre o passado. Todas essas perspectivas estão inseridas na necessidade de problematizar os corpos, aspecto para o qual tanto a arqueologia quanto a antropologia têm contribuído significativamente. A partir de diferentes vias de análise, pesquisadores argumentaram que os corpos são ao mesmo tempo, biologia e cultura, superando aquela posição que os vês como uma entidade natural e pré-social na qual os significados culturais são impressos (Knapp e Meskell, 1997; Ingold, 2000; Fowler, 2002; Hamilakis et al., 2002; Thomas, 2007). Este dossiê reúne cinco dos dezessete trabalhos apresentados no simpósio homônimo desenvolvido no marco do XX Congresso Nacional de Arqueologia Argentina, de 15 a 19 de julho de 2019 na cidade de Córdoba, sob a coordenação de Mariana Fabra e Soledad Salega , e o relatório de Leticia Cortés. O objetivo principal deste simpósio foi socializar e refletir sobre as pesquisas bioarqueológicas realizadas a partir de uma perspectiva osteobiográfica que contava histórias de vida singulares a partir do estudo de restos humanos. Esse espaço possibilitou debater, a partir de estudos de casos concretos, a geração de conhecimento sobre a vida de pessoas, histórica e culturalmente situadas. Facultad de Filosofía y Humanidades. Museo de Antropología 2020-12-23 info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion Peer reviewed article Artículo revisado por pares Artigo revisado por pares application/pdf https://revistas.unc.edu.ar/index.php/antropologia/article/view/31076 Revista del Museo de Antropología; Vol 13 (2020) ISSUE 3; 175-178 Revista del Museo de Antropología; Vol 13 (2020) NÚMERO 3; 175-178 Revista del Museo de Antropología; Vol 13 (2020) NÚMERO 3; 175-178 1852-4826 1852-060X 10.31048/1852.4826.v13.n3 spa https://revistas.unc.edu.ar/index.php/antropologia/article/view/31076/32163 South America Sudamérica Sul america Derechos de autor 2020 Mariana Fabra, Soledad Salega, Leticia I. Cortés https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0 |