Osteobiography: A Platform for Bioarchaeological Research.

Lauren Hosek, John Robb
{"title":"Osteobiography: A Platform for Bioarchaeological Research.","authors":"Lauren Hosek,&nbsp;John Robb","doi":"10.5744/bi.2019.1005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Osteobiography provides a rich basis for understanding the past, but its conceptual framework has not been outlined systematically. It stands in conceptual opposition to a traditional statistical approach to bioarchaeology modeled upon clinical studies in biomedicine, but is interdependent with it. As such, its position mirrors those of clinical case histories as opposed to statistical studies, participant-observation ethnography as opposed to quantitative sociology, and microhistory and biography as opposed to quantitative history. Such disciplinary comparisons provide a framework for exploring the strengths and weaknesses of osteobiography. It is not merely a tool for engagingly illustrating the \"typical\" life history as established statistically. Rather, it allows us to understand issues that population studies cannot explore. These include both analytical directions (exploring the complexity of deeply layered data, understanding the role of contingency in human lives, integrating osteological and cultural evidence) and philosophical directions (the interaction of material and conceptual factors in the creation of human bodies, embodiment, the experience of time).</p>","PeriodicalId":92991,"journal":{"name":"Bioarchaeology international","volume":"3 1","pages":"1-15"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7254840/pdf/EMS86390.pdf","citationCount":"39","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bioarchaeology international","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5744/bi.2019.1005","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 39

Abstract

Osteobiography provides a rich basis for understanding the past, but its conceptual framework has not been outlined systematically. It stands in conceptual opposition to a traditional statistical approach to bioarchaeology modeled upon clinical studies in biomedicine, but is interdependent with it. As such, its position mirrors those of clinical case histories as opposed to statistical studies, participant-observation ethnography as opposed to quantitative sociology, and microhistory and biography as opposed to quantitative history. Such disciplinary comparisons provide a framework for exploring the strengths and weaknesses of osteobiography. It is not merely a tool for engagingly illustrating the "typical" life history as established statistically. Rather, it allows us to understand issues that population studies cannot explore. These include both analytical directions (exploring the complexity of deeply layered data, understanding the role of contingency in human lives, integrating osteological and cultural evidence) and philosophical directions (the interaction of material and conceptual factors in the creation of human bodies, embodiment, the experience of time).

骨传记:生物考古研究的平台。
骨传记学为理解过去提供了丰富的基础,但其概念框架尚未系统地概述。它在概念上反对以生物医学临床研究为模型的传统生物考古学统计方法,但与之相互依存。因此,它的地位反映了与统计研究相反的临床病例史,与定量社会学相反的参与者观察民族志,与定量历史相反的微观史和传记。这样的学科比较为探索骨传记学的优势和劣势提供了一个框架。它不仅仅是一个工具,引人入胜地说明“典型”的生活史,作为统计建立。相反,它使我们能够理解人口研究无法探索的问题。这些包括分析方向(探索深层数据的复杂性,理解偶然性在人类生活中的作用,整合骨骼学和文化证据)和哲学方向(在人体创造中物质和概念因素的相互作用,体现,时间的经验)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信