Export Publication

Dias, N. (2024). Epistemic practices and blurred boundaries: Human remains in the history of archaeology. In Margarita Díaz-Andreu, Laura Coltofean  (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of the history of archaeology . (pp. 193-217). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

N. S. Dias,  "Epistemic practices and blurred boundaries: Human remains in the history of archaeology", in The Oxford handbook of the history of archaeology , Margarita Díaz-Andreu, Laura Coltofean , Ed., Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2024, pp. 193-217

@incollection{dias2024_1785924888095,
	author = "Dias, N.",
	title = "Epistemic practices and blurred boundaries: Human remains in the history of archaeology",
	chapter = "",
	booktitle = "The Oxford handbook of the history of archaeology ",
	year = "2024",
	volume = "",
	series = "",
	edition = "",
	pages = "193-193",
	publisher = "Oxford University Press",
	address = "Oxford",
	url = "https://global.oup.com/academic/product/the-oxford-handbook-of-the-history-of-archaeology-9780190092504?cc=pt&lang=en&#"
}

TY  - CHAP
TI  - Epistemic practices and blurred boundaries: Human remains in the history of archaeology
T2  - The Oxford handbook of the history of archaeology 
AU  - Dias, N.
PY  - 2024
SP  - 193-217
DO  - 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190092504.013.11
CY  - Oxford
UR  - https://global.oup.com/academic/product/the-oxford-handbook-of-the-history-of-archaeology-9780190092504?cc=pt&lang=en&#
AB  - This chapter examines the changing status, role, and uses of human remains in the history of archaeology. By focusing on the epistemic and material practices, it seeks to emphasize connections and tensions between archaeology and anthropology, as well as blurred boundaries between these two fields of inquiry. This chapter explores the processes through which human remains were progressively considered as material evidence of human differences and of the human past in spite of disagreements on what counted as evidence in archaeology and in anthropology. The chapter also considers nationalistic and political attempts to establish past–present continuities and correspondences (by means of craniology) between presumed “races” and prehistoric periods. Finally, the chapter examines diverse meanings and ethical implications of the term “human remains” and argues that different values involved in the current debates on human remains need to be situated in a broad comparative and historical perspective.

ER  -