I would suggest that those interested in  the cultural reaction to 
archeological research start collecting news stories and interviews asap.

Conrad

-----Original Message----- 
From: Davis, Daniel (KYTC)
Sent: Thursday, May 02, 2013 12:25 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Cannibalism at Jamestown

We already knew they practiced cannibalism at Jamestown, as the settlers had 
written accounts of such. This just backs up the historical record.

Daniel B. Davis
Archaeologist Coordinator
Kentucky Transportation Cabinet
Division of Environmental Analysis
200 Mero Street
Frankfort, KY 40622
(502) 564-7250
-----Original Message-----
From: HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Benjamin 
Carter
Sent: Thursday, May 02, 2013 12:18 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Cannibalism at Jamestown

All,

I just want to be clear that by "controversial" I simply meant that 
introducing cannibalism into the origin story of the American colonies is 
not going to happily be accepted by all. People eating people, especially at 
one of the hallowed centers of American history, will be controversial, no 
matter how good the science is. Indeed for some people, this will be one of 
those points where belief clashes with evidence. In those situations, 
evidence loses all too often. I can already see the critics deconstructing 
the evidence, much as has been done for human evolution (another point where 
belief and science collide). Even a suggestion that Kelso or Owsley did 
something "incorrect" will lead to all evidence being discounted. To be a 
bit of a conspiracy theorist, I even wonder if state school boards will 
discuss whether or not this should be taught in public classrooms. OK, I'm 
going a bit far here, but the point remains. It will be controversial, even 
if the science was perfectly
executed and cannibalism is the best supported hypothesis.

And, although these two are respected authorities and the Smithsonian 
article is quite good, I look forward to the scholarly work where they lay 
out all of the evidence. My bet is that the science is good, but withhold 
judgement until I actually see it.

Cheers,
Ben Carter


On 5/2/2013 11:37 AM, scarlett wrote:
> I would say that this work goes well beyond simply confirming documentary 
> sources.  This story paints an extraordinarily vivid picture of historical 
> events in a way that nothing else has ever done before regarding the 
> Starving Time at Jamestown.  I would say that this work, which combines 
> historical, forensic, and archaeological evidence is exactly the kind of 
> thing that historical archaeology is good at-- telling stories about past 
> events with diverse source material to create richly textured 
> understandings of the human experience.
>
> I hope to see the exhibit someday.
>
> Cheers,
> Tim
>
>
> On May 2, 2013, at 10:34 AM, sent wrote:
>
>> I don't know about controversial- I trust the science and the 
>> professionals involved couldn't be more skilled.
>> The historical record has documented cannibalism so that was well known
>> This is just   good forensic proof.
>> If anything it will strengthen the validity of  historical primary
>> sources
>>
>> Conrad
>>
>> -----Original Message----- From: Benjamin Carter
>> Sent: Thursday, May 02, 2013 10:12 AM
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> Subject: Cannibalism at Jamestown
>>
>> All,
>>
>> This is one of  the most fascinating (and likely controversial)
>> headlines that I have seen in a while.
>>
>> http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history-archaeology/Starving-Settlers-i
>> n-Jamestown-Colony-Resorted-to-Eating-A-Child-205472161.html#.UYJeNtS
>> AAmE.email
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Ben Carter