Castles and Coprolites

It's that time of year when many recent PhDs and ECRs are thinking about their next career move. I am currently fielding a number of enquiries about this, from people interested in working with us in the NEMCAS lab , and it made me realise yet one more thing that is not always made clear to people early on in their academic careers. The word postdoc is used to generally to describe roles that a researcher undertakes after their PhD, but it's a broad label that actually conceals important distinctions. The biggest distinction is between a postdoctoral research associate (PDRA) employed on someone else's grant, and an independent research fellow holding their own funding. Both have PhDs, both are researchers. Both may publish papers, supervise students, and contribute to major discoveries, but the relationship they have to the research itself is fundamentally different. A PDRA is employed to work on a project that has been conceived, designed, and funded under the leadership ...

A couple of months ago, I was invited to become a Fellow of the Geological Society of London . It was a nice moment of recognition, and one I was very happy to accept. At the same time, I’m also aware that this is not entirely unusual - learned societies are, understandably, looking to broaden their memberships, and a Professor of Geoarchaeology is an obvious easy win. Still, there is something genuinely meaningful about being welcomed into an organisation with such a long and influential history. The Geological Society of London, founded in 1807, is the oldest geological society in the world, and one that has played a central role in shaping how we understand the Earth. It has been home to many of the figures whose work underpins not just geology, but also archaeology, palaeoecology, and environmental science more broadly. To be part of that lineage, however loosely, feels significant. I am especially happy as the Society actually is closely linked to the history of my own research. C...

For a discipline fundamentally concerned with people, archaeology has long relied on a surprisingly narrow definition of what constitutes the human body in the past. Human remains, in most archaeological and heritage contexts, effectively mean bones. Occasionally teeth and cremated material. But much of what bodies actually produce, shed, and leave behind falls outside these dominant categories and, as a result, outside many of our analytical priorities and ethical frameworks. My recent paper in World Archaeology, More than bones: rethinking ethics and epistemologies of bodily exuviae in archaeology , reflects on this imbalance. It brings together a range of what can be termed bodily exuviae, coprolites, dental calculus, material traces of bodily processes, and suggests that we take them seriously, both analytically and ethically. It has been encouraging to see that the paper is already among the journal’s most-read articles over the past 12 months, which hopefully indicates that peopl...