The Nabataean Urban Experiment and Dental Disease and Childhood Stress

Perry, Megan A.; Lieurance, Alysha J.

doi:10.1007/978-3-030-53417-2_17

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 59 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…at Harrapa (c. 2550–2030 BCE) reveals greater molar occlusal wear in males and higher prevalence of most pathological lesions in females (Lukacs, 2017). Perry and Lieurance (2020) examine oral health and LEH in nonadults at Petra (first century BCE–first century CE), in modern‐day Jordan, to elucidate frailty and dietary patterns within the city. The results indicate that LEH and dental calculus were more frequent in the “elite” façade tombs, which the researchers argue reflect survival of childhood stress episodes.…”

Section: Bioarchaeological Studies Of Urbanizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Toward a bioarchaeology of urbanization: Demography, health, and behavior in cities in the past

Betsinger

DeWitte

2021

American J Phys Anthropol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Urbanization is one of the most important settlement shifts in human history and has been the focus of research within bioarchaeology for decades. However, there have been limited attempts to synthesize the results of these studies in order to gain a broader perspective on whether or how urbanization affects the biology, demography, and behavior of humans, and how these potential effects are embodied in the human skeleton. This paper outlines how bioarchaeology is well-suited to examine urbanization in the past, and we provide an overview and examples of three main ways in which urbanization is studied in bioarchaeological research: comparison of (often contemporaneous) urban and rural sites, synchronic studies of the variation that exists within and between urban sites, and investigations of changes that occur within urban sites over time. Studies of urbanization, both within bioarchaeology and in other fields of study, face a number of limitations, including a lack of a consensus regarding what urban and urbanization mean, the assumed dichotomous nature of urban versus rural settlements, the supposition that urbanization is universally bad for people, and the assumption (at least in practice) of homogeneity within urban and rural populations. Bioarchaeologists can address these limitations by utilizing a wide array of data and methods, and the studies described here collectively demonstrate the complex, nuanced, and highly variable effects of urbanization.

show abstract

Section: Bioarchaeological Studies Of Urbanizationmentioning

confidence: 99%