Vše

Co hledáte?

Vše
Projekty
Výsledky výzkumu
Subjekty

Rychlé hledání

  • Projekty podpořené TA ČR
  • Významné projekty
  • Projekty s nejvyšší státní podporou
  • Aktuálně běžící projekty

Chytré vyhledávání

  • Takto najdu konkrétní +slovo
  • Takto z výsledků -slovo zcela vynechám
  • “Takto můžu najít celou frázi”

The “Archaeological” and “Biological” Sex of an Individual – Why Do they Sometimes Differ?

Identifikátory výsledku

  • Kód výsledku v IS VaVaI

    <a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F00216224%3A14210%2F20%3A00114227" target="_blank" >RIV/00216224:14210/20:00114227 - isvavai.cz</a>

  • Výsledek na webu

  • DOI - Digital Object Identifier

Alternativní jazyky

  • Jazyk výsledku

    angličtina

  • Název v původním jazyce

    The “Archaeological” and “Biological” Sex of an Individual – Why Do they Sometimes Differ?

  • Popis výsledku v původním jazyce

    The determination of sex in archaeological skeletal findings, in this case those in the graves discovered at Pohansko, has been a matter of controversy since the outset of collaboration between archaeologists and anthropologists. Such discrimination depends on the scientific opinion of experts, the theoretical and practical knowledge they have at their disposal, and the methods they choose to approach the grave/skeleton. Four graves out of the 205 found in the early medieval stronghold of Břeclav-Pohansko (CZ), specifically in the Southern Suburb, presented discrepancies between ‘archaeological’ and ‘anthropological’ sex/gender. Two of these were child graves in which earrings appeared (graves JP/100, JP/155) and one belonged to an adult individual with the earrings in a functional position (grave JP/160). All these skeletons were determined to be male individuals on the basis of aDNA analysis. On the other hand, according to aDNA analysis, an axe accompanied one adult skeleton that was determined to be that of a female (grave JP/103). The present paper discusses the quality of the evidence used, together with the cogency and logical reasoning of the archaeological and anthropological approaches. When there is contradiction between the anthropological and archaeological sex determination of a particular individual, arriving at a consensus depends on several key points: the state of the environment surrounding the archaeological finding, the quality of documentation, the condition of the skeletal material, the anthropological (archaeological) methods employed, and the archaeologist’s (anthropologist’s) judgement.

  • Název v anglickém jazyce

    The “Archaeological” and “Biological” Sex of an Individual – Why Do they Sometimes Differ?

  • Popis výsledku anglicky

    The determination of sex in archaeological skeletal findings, in this case those in the graves discovered at Pohansko, has been a matter of controversy since the outset of collaboration between archaeologists and anthropologists. Such discrimination depends on the scientific opinion of experts, the theoretical and practical knowledge they have at their disposal, and the methods they choose to approach the grave/skeleton. Four graves out of the 205 found in the early medieval stronghold of Břeclav-Pohansko (CZ), specifically in the Southern Suburb, presented discrepancies between ‘archaeological’ and ‘anthropological’ sex/gender. Two of these were child graves in which earrings appeared (graves JP/100, JP/155) and one belonged to an adult individual with the earrings in a functional position (grave JP/160). All these skeletons were determined to be male individuals on the basis of aDNA analysis. On the other hand, according to aDNA analysis, an axe accompanied one adult skeleton that was determined to be that of a female (grave JP/103). The present paper discusses the quality of the evidence used, together with the cogency and logical reasoning of the archaeological and anthropological approaches. When there is contradiction between the anthropological and archaeological sex determination of a particular individual, arriving at a consensus depends on several key points: the state of the environment surrounding the archaeological finding, the quality of documentation, the condition of the skeletal material, the anthropological (archaeological) methods employed, and the archaeologist’s (anthropologist’s) judgement.

Klasifikace

  • Druh

    D - Stať ve sborníku

  • CEP obor

  • OECD FORD obor

    60102 - Archaeology

Návaznosti výsledku

  • Projekt

    <a href="/cs/project/GA18-15480S" target="_blank" >GA18-15480S: Smrt, pohřeb a kostra prizmatem funerální archeologie a tafonomie: pohřebiště u druhého kostela na Pohansku (Břeclav)</a><br>

  • Návaznosti

    P - Projekt vyzkumu a vyvoje financovany z verejnych zdroju (s odkazem do CEP)

Ostatní

  • Rok uplatnění

    2020

  • Kód důvěrnosti údajů

    S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů

Údaje specifické pro druh výsledku

  • Název statě ve sborníku

    Multiple Identities in Prehistory, Early History and Presence : Proceedings of the SASPRO workshops in Klement (Austria) and Nitra (Slovakia) 2018. Archaeologica Slovaca Monographiae - Communicationes, Tomus XXIV

  • ISBN

    9788081960352

  • ISSN

  • e-ISSN

  • Počet stran výsledku

    14

  • Strana od-do

    117-130

  • Název nakladatele

    Archeologický ústav Slovenskej akadémie vied

  • Místo vydání

    Nitra

  • Místo konání akce

    Nitra

  • Datum konání akce

    1. 1. 2018

  • Typ akce podle státní příslušnosti

    EUR - Evropská akce

  • Kód UT WoS článku