I guess we should wish all the researchers Bone Appetit.

....couldn't resist that one.



-----Original Message-----
From: HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of
Davis, Daniel (KYTC)
Sent: Thursday, May 02, 2013 11:26 AM
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