No abstract

Boston’s “Big Dig” construction project resulted in the excavation of multiple archaeological sites dating from the seventeenth to nineteenth centuries, including the Great House/Three Cranes Tavern in Charlestown, Massachusetts (USA). An otherwise unremarkable pit below the tavern foundation contained bones originally identified as a cat skeleton, which has subsequently been reidentified as a dog. This paper discusses site context, osteological evidence for the dog’s reclassification, and the shifts in cultural meaning this may indicate. Employing an osteobiographical approach, it draws together points of connection between the modern skeletal assessment, a series of 1980s excavations, and the motivations of eighteenth-century tavern inhabitants.

Often mentioned as an afterthought in sentences about her more (in)famous husband, Sally R. Binford has long been a focus of feminist archaeological discussion. She helped create the ‘New Archaeology’ and thus set the stage for an academic revolution, yet she has become one of the discipline's hidden figures, overshadowed by the lengthy career of Lewis Binford. Sally's own words allow us insight into the dynamic between the two Binfords; a case study on academic exploitation that may be more of a rule than of an exception. Rossiter's (1993) ‘Matthew/Matilda effect’—the paradigm whereby the work of influential scientific men can often be directly attributed to their unpublished or otherwise disenfranchised wives—is a useful analytical lens with which to expand discussions of ethics in citation, collaboration, and mentorship. How does archaeology as a discipline reconcile the legacy of unattributed fieldwork and research that has bolstered its growth? A review of publicly available documents on authorship and attribution reveals a lack of clear guidance on the subject. Institutional frameworks can ensure that students and faculty have these types of discussions early and often.