Skip to main content

Unit information: Diet and Dating in Prehistory in 2013/14

Please note: you are viewing unit and programme information for a past academic year. Please see the current academic year for up to date information.

Unit name Diet and Dating in Prehistory
Unit code ARCH30023
Credit points 20
Level of study H/6
Teaching block(s) Teaching Block 1 (weeks 1 - 12)
Unit director Dr. Cramp
Open unit status Open
Pre-requisites

none

Co-requisites

none

School/department Department of Anthropology and Archaeology
Faculty Faculty of Arts

Description including Unit Aims

Archaeologists currently have an array of scientific approaches at their fingertips which can be exploited to extract dietary and chronometric information from ancient artefacts and deposits. This information is, in turn, invaluable for elucidating the life history of a settlement and culture, in terms of resource exploitation and management, cultural responses to internal and external stimuli, and to relate events chronologically to their broader cultural and environmental context. This unit seeks to equip students with the skills required in order to understand the scientific principles underpinning these approaches, such that they are able to apply, interpret and critically assess the various techniques which are commonly utilised for dating and dietary reconstruction.

UNIT AIMS

Students will gain understanding of:

i The principles underlying key dating techniques (e.g. 14C dating, U-series, ESR, fission track, K-Ar/Ar-Ar, dendrochronology, varves, obsidian hydration,) and palaeodietary proxies (stable isotopes, organic residues, faunal remains, botanical remains, ethno- and experimental archaeology, human bones)

ii The biases or limitations inherent in various methodologies Students will become equipped with the following:

iii The ability to interpret the types of data used in palaeodietary and dating studies

iv Practical laboratory-based skills

v The ability to write up scientific projects

vi The ability to critically evaluate the application and interpretation of palaeodietary proxies and dating techniques.

Intended Learning Outcomes

At the end of the unit, a successful student will be able to:

1) explain the underlying principles and in turn, the strengths, limitations and biases inherent in the application and interpretation of the respective approaches. In doing so they will be able to:

2) evaluate the most appropriate scientific methods to address a research question and available material.

3) critically assess the application of scientific techniques for palaeodietary or chronological reconstruction.

4) handle and present scientific data (e.g. calibrating 14C dates, Bayesian statistics, plotting stable isotope values)

5) interpret and interrogate scientific data (e.g. interpreting mass spectra, stable isotope values, pollen diagrams, mortality profiles)

6) demonstrate laboratory skills and reporting results

Teaching Information

10 x 1-hour lectures 9 x 2-hour workshops.

1 x tutorials 2 x 1 hr visits to scientific facilities

Assessment Information

Formative assessments Weekly workshops where students will be required to interpret information and feed back their findings to the group.

Summative assessments: One 3000 word essay (50 %; outcomes 1 – 3; 5 ) One laboratory notebook (25 %; outcomes 4 – 6) One mock ‘Referee’s report’ (25 %; outcomes 1 – 3)

Reading and References

  • Aitken, M. Science-based dating in Archaeology. Longman Archaeology Series
  • Bar-Yosef, O. (2000) The impact of radiocarbon dating on old world archaeology: past achievements and future expectations. Radiocarbon 42(1), 23-39.
  • Brothwell, D &Pollard, M. (eds., 2000) Handbook of Archaeological Sciences. John Wiley &Sons.
  • Evershed, RP. (2008) Organic residue analysis in archaeology: the archaeological biomarker revolution. Archaeometry 50: 895-924.
  • Payne S. 1973. Kill-off patterns in sheep and goats: the mandibles from Asvan Kale. Anatolian Studies 23: 281–303
  • Zohary D &Hopf, M. (2000) Domestication of plants in the Old World. New York: Oxford University Press

Feedback