Redefining Childhood through Bioarchaeology: Toward an Archaeological and Biological Understanding of Children in Antiquity

Perry, Megan A.

doi:10.1525/ap3a.2005.15.89

Cited by 45 publications

(29 citation statements)

References 133 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The reasons for the lack of attention given to deciduous teeth are straightforward. First, research focusing on subadult remains and children, in general, has been more limited, a trend that has recently been reversed due to an emphasis on childhood as a distinct research focus in the life course of ancient societies (Halcrow & Tayles, ; Lewis, ; Perry, ; Thompson, Alfonso‐Durruty, & Crandall, ). Second, in certain contexts archaeologists recover fewer subadult than adult skeletal remains, which could reflect preservation biases or mortuary practices that segregate the young from cemetery contexts inclusive to older children, adolescents, and adults.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparative performance of deciduous and permanent dental morphology in detecting biological relatives

Paul

Stojanowski

2017

American J Phys Anthropol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Overall, morphological traits of permanent tooth crowns perform moderately well in distinguishing relatives from non-relatives, but deciduous crown variations may provide a more direct reflection of the underlying genetic structure of intra-site or intra-cemetery samples. These findings have implications for bioarchaeological research and biodistance practices. In particular, morphological traits of the deciduous dentition should be incorporated into standard data collection protocols because of their stronger signal of relatedness.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparative performance of deciduous and permanent dental morphology in detecting biological relatives

Paul

Stojanowski

2017

American J Phys Anthropol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example, Joanna Sofaer () and Rebecca Gowland () emphasize the developmental process of gender over the life course, linking the study of gender with aging. Life course approaches such as these have also been used in recent years to consider aspect of aging and growing old (Robb, ; Gowland, ; Appleby, ), or childhood from archaeological skeletons (Perry, ; Redfern and Gowland, ; Barrett, ; Blom and Knudson, ; Ellis, ). Fundamentally, the emphasis in these approaches is on the importance of social life in the creation of the biological skeleton.…”

Section: Examining Plasticity and Life Histories In Bioarchaeologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Bone morphologies and histories: Life course approaches in bioarchaeology

Agarwal

2016

American J Phys Anthropol

130

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The duality of the skeleton as both a biological and cultural entity has formed the theoretical basis of bioarchaeology. In recent years bioarchaeological studies have stretched the early biocultural concept with the adoption of life course approaches in their study design and analyses, making a significant contribution to how we think about the role of postnatal plasticity. Life course theory is a conceptual framework used in several scientific fields of biology and the social sciences. Studies that emphasize life course approaches in the examination of bone morphology in the past are united in their interrogation of human life as a result of interrelated and cumulative events over not only the timeframe of individuals, but also over generations at the community level. This article provides an overview of the theoretical constructs that utilize the life course concept, and a discussion of the different ways these theories have been applied to thinking about trajectories of bone morphology in the past, specifically highlighting key recent studies that have used life course approaches to understand the influence of growth, stress, diet, activity, and aging on the skeleton. The goal of this article is to demonstrate the scope of contemporary bioarchaeological studies that illuminate the importance of environmental and behavioral influence on bone morphology. Understanding how trajectories of bone growth and morphology can be altered and shaped over the life course is critical not only for bioarchaeologists, but also researchers studying bone morphology in living nonhuman primates and fossil primate skeletons. Am J Phys Anthropol 159:S130-S149,

show abstract

“…Previous bioarchaeological work on kinship analysis has almost exclusively emphasized relationships between adults using permanent tooth crown phenotypes, which omits the crucial periods of infancy and childhood. This is unfortunate because adult-centered analyses ignore burgeoning broad-based interests in the "anthropology of children" (Baxter, 2005;Lancy, 2008;Montgomery, 2009), which can benefit from the temporal perspectives that only bioarchaeology can offer, as demonstrated in a number of recent publications (e.g., Perry, 2006;Lewis, 2007;Halcrow and Tayles, 2011;Thompson et al, 2014). For the most part, the increased visibility of childhood research in bioarchaeology has lacked a comprehensive biodistance component that might inte-grate children into more holistic understandings of kinship in the past (but see Pilloud and Larsen, 2011).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%