|
The Modern Antiquarian Forum » Cancer in the Neolithic? |
Log In to post a reply
|
|
|
|
| Topic View: Flat | Threaded | |
|
Evergreen Dazed 1881 posts |
Jan 26, 2017, 15:50
|
||
|
Monganaut wrote: Contrary to that, I've also read that evidence has been found (forget where/when) that quite sick and badly physically disabled people were well looked after in the Neolithic/Bronze Age, evidence being that the skeletal remains showed they liver longer than could have been expected with the physical ailments they had. Yes, it doesn't sit well next to ideas of inter-personal violence does it? However, the man found in WKLB that George mentioned earlier (LSA near throat, possibly murdered) may have suffered from Spina Bifida. He certainly had a spinal collapse. He was old when he died. He also had various other injuries (an arm fracture iirc) that had healed.
|
|||
tiompan 5758 posts |
Jan 26, 2017, 16:14
|
||
|
Evergreen Dazed wrote: tiompan wrote: Evergreen Dazed wrote: tiompan wrote: Is Pomo losing it's grip ?. I sincerely hope so. (pun intended) http://www.metamodernism.com/2015/01/12/metamodernism-a-brief-introduction/ https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Sincerity In Franzen's "The Corrections " Chip sells his collection of critical theory books for a small fraction of their original cost , the money going on a fancy salmon to impress his girl friend . Maybe starting soon , if it didn't start some time ago the pomo texts will start to fill up the second hand bookshops and the dosh spent on a nice bit of scran . Can't think of better use . As for it's impact on archaeology , millions of student /lecturer hours spent attempting to understand it and a similar amount attempting to apply it unsuccessfully to the discipline. Then we have to wade through the resulting verbiage to discover , nothing . Correct me if i'm facing in the wrong direction (and I do mean that) but I always imagined it was not so much directly applying postmodern thought to archaeology, as an explosion of subjectivity in light of all aspects of postmodern society? Archaeology almost taken along in the flow, if you like. Is discovering 'nothing' a fair thing to say? It was more than just subjectivity , we had that before PoMo , it was obfuscation , verbiage and shoehorning ( most often post structuralism or sociological theory) into an already threadbare archaeological one . From volume too value , maybe not nothing , but not much more .
|
|||
|
tiompan 5758 posts |
Jan 26, 2017, 16:19
|
||
|
Evergreen Dazed wrote: Evergreen Dazed wrote: tiompan wrote: Evergreen Dazed wrote: tiompan wrote: Is Pomo losing it's grip ?. I sincerely hope so. (pun intended) http://www.metamodernism.com/2015/01/12/metamodernism-a-brief-introduction/ https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Sincerity In Franzen's "The Corrections " Chip sells his collection of critical theory books for a small fraction of their original cost , the money going on a fancy salmon to impress his girl friend . Maybe starting soon , if it didn't start some time ago the pomo texts will start to fill up the second hand bookshops and the dosh spent on a nice bit of scran . Can't think of better use . As for it's impact on archaeology , millions of student /lecturer hours spent attempting to understand it and a similar amount attempting to apply it unsuccessfully to the discipline. Then we have to wade through the resulting verbiage to discover , nothing . Correct me if i'm facing in the wrong direction (and I do mean that) but I always imagined it was not so much directly applying postmodern thought to archaeology, as an explosion of subjectivity in light of all aspects of postmodern society? Archaeology almost taken along in the flow, if you like. Is discovering 'nothing' a fair thing to say? Are you saying that subjectivity precludes the finding of truths? I can see that, but would ask how better 'truths' are arrived at? Without adopting a PP approach are we not in danger of finding lots, but saying very little? Isn't it all then best just left in the ground? See above re.subjectivity , the use /misreading of phenomenology is one aspect of subjectivity that has provided plenty of material but little light . I don't have a problem with leaving it (or the vast majority) in the ground , for later generations .
|
|||
Monganaut 2380 posts |
Jan 26, 2017, 16:22
|
||
I guess it just goes to show, our essential nature hasn't really changed/evolved over all that time. Despite our environment and living conditions changing beyond recognition. We can still be amazing to each other, or horribly uncaring, fickle, manipulative, brutal and murderous. Funny bunch of fuckers is us humans.
|
|||
|
tiompan 5758 posts |
Jan 26, 2017, 16:24
|
||
|
Evergreen Dazed wrote: tiompan wrote: Windmill Hill : Burl believed the skulls in the ditches could have been trophies Never read this. I'd be interested to know why he thought that. Source? That should not have been included , as it is not evidence .Well spotted , thanks . The source . "Prehistoric Avebury "p`116 ." It seems likely that some of the bones were brought to WH for magico religious rites " Which doesn't add up to too much .
|
|||
|
tiompan 5758 posts |
Jan 26, 2017, 16:26
|
||
|
tjj wrote: Thanks very much for your comprehensive answer Tiompan - which I have read. In some ways it answers Sanctuary's original question about cancer. I imagine it would have been rare for anyone, especially men, to live long enough to develop it. And women were routinely dying in childbirth until comparatively recently. The Amesbury Archer lived with a traumatic injury but did he actually die a violent death? And also ... (I should know) what does BTA stand for - guessing, bronze tipped arrowhead? Ooops , sorry , just a quick copy and paste ,hence the Windmill Hill bollocks spotted by ED . BTA = Barbed and tanged arrowhead .
|
|||
|
tiompan 5758 posts |
Jan 26, 2017, 17:05
|
||
|
tjj wrote: Thanks very much for your comprehensive answer Tiompan - It was just a small compilation of UK examples June not quite up to date and obviously excluding continental examples . Btw the male child with blunt trauma from Belas Knap was estimated at 10 yrs old .
|
|||
|
Evergreen Dazed 1881 posts |
Jan 26, 2017, 17:34
|
||
|
Monganaut wrote: I guess it just goes to show, our essential nature hasn't really changed/evolved over all that time. Despite our environment and living conditions changing beyond recognition. We can still be amazing to each other, or horribly uncaring, fickle, manipulative, brutal and murderous. Funny bunch of fuckers is us humans. I suppose so. I'd like to think most people are fundamentally good, or attempt to do the right things in life. Maybe a lot of where that goes wrong is down to circumstances, i really don't know. As a 'default' setting I don't think it's beneficial for an individual to be aggressive towards another. I remember reading about a theory on why strangers say "hello" to eachother only when they meet out in the countryside or a remote location. They're in a vulnerable situation and it's safer to make a friend than an enemy, basically.
|
|||
|
Evergreen Dazed 1881 posts |
Edited Jan 26, 2017, 17:59
Jan 26, 2017, 17:54
|
||
|
tiompan wrote: Evergreen Dazed wrote: tiompan wrote: Evergreen Dazed wrote: tiompan wrote: Is Pomo losing it's grip ?. I sincerely hope so. (pun intended) http://www.metamodernism.com/2015/01/12/metamodernism-a-brief-introduction/ https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Sincerity In Franzen's "The Corrections " Chip sells his collection of critical theory books for a small fraction of their original cost , the money going on a fancy salmon to impress his girl friend . Maybe starting soon , if it didn't start some time ago the pomo texts will start to fill up the second hand bookshops and the dosh spent on a nice bit of scran . Can't think of better use . As for it's impact on archaeology , millions of student /lecturer hours spent attempting to understand it and a similar amount attempting to apply it unsuccessfully to the discipline. Then we have to wade through the resulting verbiage to discover , nothing . Correct me if i'm facing in the wrong direction (and I do mean that) but I always imagined it was not so much directly applying postmodern thought to archaeology, as an explosion of subjectivity in light of all aspects of postmodern society? Archaeology almost taken along in the flow, if you like. Is discovering 'nothing' a fair thing to say? It was more than just subjectivity , we had that before PoMo , it was obfuscation , verbiage and shoehorning ( most often post structuralism or sociological theory) into an already threadbare archaeological one . From volume too value , maybe not nothing , but not much more . Obfuscation, most definitely! But without the development of the post-modern would Cope ever have written The Modern Antiquarian for example? (You may or may not be a fan). If the new archaeology audience that book created is largely interested in the interpretive, is that a bad thing for archaeology? Some future archaeologists in there maybe? I'm just thinking aloud at this point, not trying to put words in yr mouth or support any particular argument. If we look at Burls books, Prehistoric Avebury for exmaple (as it's been mentioned) would you call his approach post-modern?
|
|||
|
tiompan 5758 posts |
Jan 26, 2017, 18:11
|
||
|
Evergreen Dazed wrote: tiompan wrote: Evergreen Dazed wrote: tiompan wrote: Evergreen Dazed wrote: tiompan wrote: Is Pomo losing it's grip ?. I sincerely hope so. (pun intended) http://www.metamodernism.com/2015/01/12/metamodernism-a-brief-introduction/ https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Sincerity In Franzen's "The Corrections " Chip sells his collection of critical theory books for a small fraction of their original cost , the money going on a fancy salmon to impress his girl friend . Maybe starting soon , if it didn't start some time ago the pomo texts will start to fill up the second hand bookshops and the dosh spent on a nice bit of scran . Can't think of better use . As for it's impact on archaeology , millions of student /lecturer hours spent attempting to understand it and a similar amount attempting to apply it unsuccessfully to the discipline. Then we have to wade through the resulting verbiage to discover , nothing . Correct me if i'm facing in the wrong direction (and I do mean that) but I always imagined it was not so much directly applying postmodern thought to archaeology, as an explosion of subjectivity in light of all aspects of postmodern society? Archaeology almost taken along in the flow, if you like. Is discovering 'nothing' a fair thing to say? It was more than just subjectivity , we had that before PoMo , it was obfuscation , verbiage and shoehorning ( most often post structuralism or sociological theory) into an already threadbare archaeological one . From volume too value , maybe not nothing , but not much more . Obfuscation, most definitely! But without the development of the post-modern would Cope ever have written The Modern Antiquarian for example? (You may or may not be a fan). Maybe if the new archaeology audience that book created are largely interested in the interpretive, is that a bad thing for archaeology? I'm just thinking aloud at this point, not trying to put words in yr mouth or support any particular argument. If we look at Burls books, Prehistoric Avebury for exmaple (as it's been mentioned) would you call his approach post-modern? I have never read TMA but I very much doubt I would describe it as being influenced by POMO or that it had any impact on the reason for it being written . Again I don't know, but doubt if there is any mention of the central figures e.g. Lyotard, Derrida , Foucault , Baudrillard or even their contemporaries who had an impact in sociology/anthropology and thus archaeology but who are a bit less pm e.g. Bourdieu , Gell etc . As for Burl , definitely not .
|
| Pages: 11 – [ Previous | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 | Next ] | Add a reply to this topic |
|
|
|
| The Modern Antiquarian Forum Index | |
