scholarly journals Technology, Taphonomy, and Seasonality: Understanding Differences between Dorset and Thule Subsistence Strategies at Iqaluktuuq, Victoria Island

ARCTIC ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 69 (5) ◽  
pp. 1-15 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lesley Howse ◽  
T. Max Friesen

This paper examines differences between Late Dorset and Thule Inuit subsistence economies at the Bell site on Victoria Island, Nunavut. This location is relatively unusual in the eastern Arctic region because local subsistence was based largely on caribou and fish, rather than the sea mammals that dominate in most other regions. For both periods, animal bone samples are quantified in terms of taxonomic frequencies, element (body part) distributions, seasonality, prey demography, and bone modifications such as cutting, burning, and gnawing. A comparison between the periods indicates many broad similarities in subsistence, but some subtle differences suggest that the Thule had a more focal and specialized economy, with a slightly different seasonal profile.

Antiquity ◽  
2009 ◽  
Vol 83 (321) ◽  
pp. 669-686 ◽  
Author(s):  
Benjamin S. Arbuckle ◽  
Cheryl A. Makarewicz

The authors use metrical, demographic and body part analyses of animal bone assemblages in Anatolia to demonstrate how cattle were incorporated into early Neolithic subsistence economies. Sheep and goats were domesticated in the eighth millennium BC, while aurochs, wild cattle, were long hunted. The earliest domesticated cattle are not noted until the mid-seventh millennium BC, and derive from imported stock domesticated elsewhere. In Anatolia, meanwhile, the aurochs remains large and wild and retains its charisma as a hunted quarry and a stud animal.


2010 ◽  
Vol 430 (2) ◽  
pp. 261-264 ◽  
Author(s):  
V. I. Yusupov ◽  
A. N. Salyuk ◽  
V. N. Karnaukh ◽  
I. P. Semiletov ◽  
N. E. Shakhova

ARCTIC ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 69 (1) ◽  
pp. 1 ◽  
Author(s):  
T. Max Friesen ◽  
Lauren E.Y. Norman

This paper presents description and interpretation of the Pembroke site, the earliest known Thule Inuit occupation in the southeastern Victoria Island region, Nunavut. The site has 11 extant dwellings, including five heavy tent rings, five light semi-subterranean dwellings, and a <em>qalgiq </em>(large communal structure). The site’s economy revolved mainly around the acquisition of caribou, Arctic char, and lake trout, with minimal consumption of sea mammals. Radiocarbon dates, reinforced by artifact analyses, indicate an occupation around AD 1400. Based on several lines of evidence, including the extremely small artifact samples, the site is interpreted as having been occupied relatively briefly. It represents the first colonization of the region by Thule people, approximately 200 years after the initial Thule migration from Alaska into the eastern Arctic. Thus, it documents a second migration wave: an expansion of Thule peoples from their initially occupied territories to other, in some ways less optimal, regions


2015 ◽  
Vol 463 (2) ◽  
pp. 813-816 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. V. Lozhkin ◽  
P. M. Anderson ◽  
P. S. Minyuk ◽  
E. Yu. Nedorubova ◽  
N. A. Goryachev

Geotectonics ◽  
2007 ◽  
Vol 41 (3) ◽  
pp. 171-194 ◽  
Author(s):  
N. I. Filatova ◽  
V. E. Khain

Polar Record ◽  
2006 ◽  
Vol 42 (3) ◽  
pp. 187-204 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jarich Oosten ◽  
Frédéric Laugrand

In the western Arctic and in the northwest coast and Alaska, the significance of the raven as a creator and trickster is generally acknowledged. In the eastern Arctic there are no such elaborate mythical cycles concerning the bird. But the raven still plays an important role in myths and rituals. In this paper, some features of the Alaskan complex and the position of the raven in the eastern Arctic are discussed. The basic features of the Alaskan raven complex are used as heuristic principles guiding research into the situation in the eastern Arctic region. It is argued that in many respects the raven is responsible for society but without being part of it. As a predator and a scavenger it is often associated with eating dirt, excrement and human flesh, and yet it created light, enabling people to see and invented tattooing, enabling women to marry.


Lithos ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 292-293 ◽  
pp. 15-33 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marina V. Luchitskaya ◽  
Artem V. Moiseev ◽  
Sergey D. Sokolov ◽  
Marianna I. Tuchkova ◽  
Sergey A. Sergeev ◽  
...  

1992 ◽  
Vol 57 (2) ◽  
pp. 288-299 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. K. Harritt ◽  
S. C. Radosevich

An attempt to replicate results of a previous dietary trace-element study of northwestern Alaska (Connor and Slaughter 1984) was made with human- and animal-bone samples from the Naknek region, southwest Alaska. Trace elements of special interest are strontium and zinc because of previously postulated relation of abundances of these elements to marine and terrestrial dietary foci in human remains from archaeological sites (i.e., Nelson et al. 1986; Schoeninger and Peebles 1981). Related objectives were to develop evidence supporting Harritt's (1988) proposal for the existence of separate late prehistoric inland and coastal social and territorial entities in the region, which would be reflected as a dichotomy of trace levels in human bone; differences in abundances of strontium and zinc trace elements in bones representing each group should reflect diets based on either terrestrial fauna and plants or largely of marine sea mammals and shellfish. We find that there are no characteristic trace-element patterns for differentiating historic and late prehistoric coastal or interior inhabitants of the Alaska Peninsula, in spite of historic and archaeological evidence that indicates that such patterns should be present. This lack of patterning is traced to an erroneous assumption made initially by the present authors, and by Connor and Slaughter (1984): Because 99 percent of all digested Sr is deposited in the skeleton of vertebrates (including marine), there is no direct correlation between Sr content of human bones and the proportion of sea-mammal or teleost consumption in the prehistoric human diet.


Geotectonics ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 49 (3) ◽  
pp. 165-192 ◽  
Author(s):  
V. E. Verzhbitsky ◽  
S. D. Sokolov ◽  
M. I. Tuchkova

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document