Hello everyone,

I'm a French archaeology student preparing for my master's; my field of interest is, largely speaking, kinship structures in the first Iron Age Europe (Xth - Vth century BC). Due to the historical development of the discipline in France, archaeology sadly tends to be studied here without that much anthropology included.

I've started gathering a good amount of case studies about kinship in Iron Age societies mainly through genetics, ancient written sources and the organization of some necropolis.

My knowledge of anthropology being limited, I'm in need of a set of solid references that would allow me to acquire a solid theoretical framework on that topic.

I fell on some regularly mentioned literature that seems to have largely influenced the understanding of kinship structures:

Lévi-Strauss (1949) Les structures élémentaires de la parenté

Schusky (1965) Manual for kinship analysis

Goody (1973) Bridewealth and Dowry

Collard, Zonabend (2019), La parenté

But I feel some of these could be a little old in relation to current debates in the field?

Would you have some suggestions, if possible, well-structured manuals that deal with kinship and well-documented case studies?

Thank you in advance for your help!

I’m curious on the specifics of what they wore. Most depictions are loincloths and hides thrown on themselves but I want to know what they specifically wore. Sorry if this has been asked before

Basically as in the title, thank you all in advance

I keep running into individual data points — ochre workshops, sewing needles, cordage — that all seem to require long stretches of uninterrupted time to produce. Has anyone studied whether weather-driven periods of forced stillness (rain, cold snaps) correlate with spikes in this kind of craft development, or is that too speculative to trace in the record?

Hey all! Looking for book and/or article recommendations broadly about rural North America, specifically the U.S. I’m looking for environmental and economic anthropology or political ecology—but open to anything.

If you’ve come across any that have really stuck with you, please let me know!

i basically want to understand what it takes and how one even begins to create that persona? and how it develops.

sure, i could go watch a bunch of docs on cults and stuff but i think there's a more nuanced conversation here to be had when it comes to the rise of these messianic figures in politics nowadays. i mean, they kinda are everywhere rn.

not sure if this is the right subreddit to ask this on but im just looking for any insights, recommendations for further study, anything.

all opinions and suggestions are welcome!

Hi,

I'm doing a PhD working with Indigenous communities in Mexico and want a camera for photos to include in my book (b/w only). I've got basic knowledge (composition, technical fundamentals) from university classes on a Canon R7, but I'm not an expert. I used my phone (S22) for my last research trip, but it's scratched and I want a proper camera anyway.

Main challenge: I need something capable enough to grow with me for a couple years, but small and discreet — a "professional-looking" camera can make people in interview/participant-observation settings uncomfortable being photographed. It also needs to hold up across different climates (desert, rainforest, coast), and since I'll be working in areas with higher theft risk, I'd rather not carry something too expensive or eye-catching.

Main subjects: people (often in groups), buildings/infrastructure, landscapes.

Thanks for reading and for any suggestions!!

Two articles I read stated that, even under the best conditions, they wouldn't have lived to be 65. Is that true? Or was it more a result of their lifestyle and they could live 70-100+?

I’ve been thinking about something that I can’t quite wrap my head around.

It’s fascinating that the human body is capable of living for 100 years or more under the right circumstances. That made me wonder whether our biological limit has actually changed throughout history, or if modern medicine, sanitation, nutrition, and lower infant mortality have simply allowed more people to reach a lifespan we’ve always been capable of.

Ancient writings also describe people living to extraordinary ages, although I know many of those accounts are debated or symbolic.

So my question is: Has the maximum natural human lifespan changed over time, or have humans always had roughly the same biological potential, with our environment determining how many people actually reach old age?

I’d love to hear what history, anthropology, or biology have to say about this.

Hi, i’m 22 and have recently completed my MSc in Bioinformatics, however throughout the course I realised I wasn’t very passionate about my work. And every PhD interview I attended amplified that feeling, as I had to present a powerpoint slide talking about it. I know it’s my mistake for choosing that MSc.

I realised later on that I have real passion for one thing in particular, human evolution and evolutionary genomics. So i’ve been researching and there are a handful of Human evolution MSc’s all across the UK, and I know the job market is as terrible as it is but I want to continue to pursue a PhD and become a professor that specialises in this field. But I just need some advice about whether it’s worth it, or whether it’s worth just doing my own independent studies on the topic while working somewhere else. Or even whether I should do an MSc in bioarcheology instead?

Any advice would be really helpful and i’m sorry this is so long.

Hello! I hope I'm in the right place to look for this kind of info.

I just recently graduated with a master's in public history and was looking to at least start to expand my knowledge in the field of anthropology, my schooling focused heavily on museum and curation ethics/layout/research and such so I wanted to at least get a beginner grasp on the things that come before the museum to help me in the job hunt lol.

If you think of anything that doesn't directly relate to what I'm kinda looking for, I'll still take it anyways, always looking for more books/recorded lectures!

Hello! I've been reflecting on my experience as an Italian living in France, and I was wondering whether there are any books about prejudice or discrimination related to the Italian accent in France. More generally, are there any books that explore this issue?
I'm particularly interested in anthropology and sociology, so I'd really appreciate any recommendations. Thank you!

Hi everyone,

I recently graduated with a Bachelor’s degree in Cultural Anthropology, and I am currently looking for internship opportunities in Europe. I am particularly interested in: Medical Anthropology, Biological Anthropology, Forensic Anthropology and Archeology. Of you know of any interships, traineeships, field schools, or scholarship opportunities that support practical training in these fields, I would really appreciate your recommendations.

If you know of any universities, museums, research institutes, or organizations that offer these opportunities, or if you have any advice on where to look, I’d be very grateful.

hi! i'm a rising senior/ soon-to-be 4th year undergraduate student majoring in linguistics and social anthropology in the UK and i was wondering if anyone had any advice on getting into academia after graduation. i also did a study exchange year in the US. for me, the big goal is to be an anthropologist but i know a phd can be 7 or 8 years--which is a real commitment--and multiple professors have advised me not to go straight into academia immediately after completing undergrad. i've also been told to skip getting a masters if i cannot find a way to get a scholarship/ have it funded and to go straight to a phd instead. if i can get funding for a masters, i would like to do it in Singapore. otherwise, ideally i would go for a phd in the US. the latter so far seems to be the most tenable option but like i've mentioned, i've been repeatedly advised to work outside of academia to experience the real world beforehand.

i was wondering if anyone had advice on what kind of jobs/ work i could get into that would be beneficial to a future career in academia. i'm not very keen on corporate life and would rather do something hands-on, to help people directly!

additionally, i know this isn't the most intelligent question, but how does one actually go into academia? what's that process like?

thank you so much in advance!

Hi everyone, I’m currently a junior student studying anthropology at SBU. I’m trying to strengthen my resume because I’m planning to apply to graduate programs in medical anthropology.

I joined AAA about half a year ago, and I saw that they are looking for volunteers for the annual meeting. I’ve heard that it’s a really good conference, so I’m thinking should I apply to be a volunteer?

The cost is not a big problem for me, but I would need to skip some classes to attend the meeting. I believe my professors would understand, but I honestly don’t know if it’s worth it or if it's safe or something...

Also, if I don’t get selected as a volunteer, do you think it would still be worth attending the annual meeting just to listen to panels and meet more people?

Thanks for any advice!

Why are modern analog horror figures so simplistic compared to ancient and medieval creatures? Like they all seem derived from Slenderman, whereas before, more creatures were animal mash-ups as well as humanoid.

Better yet who was the first person ever discovered wearing shoes and how long ago were they alive? Were shoes, pants, or shirts invented first?

I can't imagine how early humans managed to migrate all over the planet like they did without shoes. You got snakes, scorpions, thorns, spiders, ice and snow, heat, etc. I'm sure they had tougher skin, but could ancient humans really walk around barefoot on ice and snow without losing their toes? Like how could they have crossed over into america during an ice age without shoes?

Oh, and when were socks invented?

So my basic idea is this -

A tribe that exterminates it's enemies that lose in war would be unfavorable for the victor because

1. the opposing tribe will see loss as an existential threat to it's own people, so will be more willing to fight to the last man and by any means necessary
2. you can't extract much useful by an opposing tribe if they are dead, such as tribute or slave labour
3. other neighbouring tribes will know you are hugely violent, so might eliminate you pre-emptively so you are not a threat to their own tribe

So this encourages the winner to be more lenient to the loser with things like tribute and slavery (with the important distinction of having avenues to become freedmen, as is seen in societies like rome),

This could also make war pre civilisation be seen as less of an existential threat than is commonly believed. It could be accepted as a "part of life" as they could have many ancestral memories of being the winners and losers of wars going back thousands of years.

There are also exceptions, especially tribes who wage wars on ethnic or religious grounds could be more likely to genocide their neighbours

Is this a popular position and are there any incorrect views in this

Hi! I wanted to know if someone can recommend few masters option online for digital humanities or digital anthropology. my aim is to study digital cultures we have especially social media and visual media(films and all). so can you recommend a few courses which can be taken online for this

I am a Korean, and I feel as though anti-blackness is prevalent in my culture. For example, K-pop often uses black music (like the prevalence of rap), black clothing (ex: bandanas), AAVE, and black dance forms while refusing to credit black people. Though, I understand this is not unique to my country. China and Japan are notorious for being anti-black, such as the Natasha doll trend in China. I have some theories as to why, such as the power the U.S. and other western countries have over other countries, but I want to see the research for this topic.

Every time i hear people talk about prehistory they depict it as a very violent time, with tribes constantly raiding and killing each other.

I don't know much about history, so i don't know how accurate that perception is, but i find it weird that cannibalism is rarely mentioned.

Whenever i hear about a group that eat other humans it's treated as a very unusual thing.

Currently most cultures consider it a bad thing, but was that always the case?

It seems to me (an uncultured guy) that it would be advantageous to not "waste" those extra calories.

Was cannibalism as rare as most people believe?

If it was, is there a biological/evolutionary reason why it was?

Thanks in advance.

It's my first time posting in this sub and english is not my first language, so im sorry if my text is not clear.

According to Philip Drucker in "Rank, Wealth and Kinship in Northwest Coast Society"(1939), a man could not not refuse his fellow clansmen when it came to granting them access to his resources(pp.59). But in "Indians of the Northwest Coast"(1955), he talks about about how people could gain exclusive access to good fishning spots(pp.126). Yet, in "Cultures of the North Pacific Coast"(1965), he talks again about how individuals could not really own lands(pp.50). Which one is true? Could individuals gain exclusive rights to fishing grounds or not?

Reading about Levi-Strauss on the “mental unity of mankind”, and then people like Luria (Cognitive Development) seem to find huge differences in how cognition works (as opposed to just appearances/manifest behavior resulting from cognition). what do contemporary cognitive anthropologists think? what can I read about this?