Christoffer Theis about Dodson, A. 2003. The Pyramids of Ancient Egypt. – London, New Holland Publishers.

Aidan Dodson verfolgt mit seinem Buch den Ansatz, eine Zusammenstellung aller Pyramiden in Ägypten zu bieten, ein „up-to-date listing of all known examples belonging to kings and queens“ (S. 6, vgl. auch S. 7 & 13). Wie Dodson bereits auf S. 6 richtig feststellt, sind zwar einerseits sehr viele Bücher über Pyramiden erschienen, andererseits stellt es aber ein Desiderat dar, dass bisher kein Corpus alle Bauwerke in extenso behandelt. [...]

• Read the entire review (PDF File)

René van Walsem about

After an overview (without title, pp. 1-10) of the history of the conglomerate of the National Museums Scotland – with special attention to the Egyptian collections and the individuals who were most closely related to their development, among whom Rhind was the most prominent – the Egyptian coffin collection is divided into seven ‘parts’.

The introduction sketches the archaeological and culture historical context. Part 1 (Cat. 1-2, pp. 12-19) describes two Middle Kingdom coffins of two men, both of whom were called Khnumhotep (no family relation), with the coffins respectively rectangular and anthropoid in shape. The main text is followed by notes, a pattern repeated for the remaining six parts. [...]

• Read the entire review (PDF file)

Alexandra A. de Sousa about

We do not know whether Neanderthals would have blended in with modern humans, but we certainly do have a lot of real (and imagined) ideas about who they were. This point is well made by the book titled “The Neanderthals”, which under the writing of Müller & Schrenk fi ts well into the series “People of the Ancient World”. Although this book has “nothing revolutionary to say”,[...]

• Read the entire review (PDF file)

Ilja Nieuwland about

The history of vertebrate paleontology has simultaneously been very well and very poorly served in the past. Certain periods have seen tens or hundreds of publications devoted to them, and there’s little new to be found out about London in the 1830s and 1840s, or the Bone Wars of the 1870s and 1880s. But there’s still a whole world to be discovered. One of the – many – admirable qualities of Brian Switek’s first book, Written in Stone, is that Switek generally steers clear from re-hashing the historical warhorses of vertebrate paleontology and so offers something that holds interest for both the lay reader and the paleontological veteran.

• Read the entire review (PDF file)

B.L. Beatty about

Paleopathology, as a science, has a deep and rich history, and most so for that which is focused on humans. Cases of pathologies in mummies, ancient buried skeletons, and even simply historical records are abundant, and have been praised not just for helping us understand the history of disease, but also in the role they play in humanizing history and historical figures. But this focus on cases has resulted in little available literature and direction in methods that are not simply the methods used by modern pathologists. While the interpretation of paleopathologies has had some very helpful standardization (Buikstra & Ubelaker, 1994), as well as discussions on theoretical limitations and opportunities in how they should be interpreted in animals in an evolutionary context (Beatty & Heckert, 2009, Beatty & Rothschild, 2009, Beatty & Dooley, 2010, Wolff, 2008, Wolff, 2009), methodologies used with modern technologies are largely relegated to the primary literature. In Pinhasi and Mays’s recent edited volume, “Advances in Human Palaeopathology”, we get a comprehensive collection of all the most up to date reviews on modern methods used in paleopathology of ancient humans. The book is organized in two parts: Analytical Approaches in Palaeopathology (chapters 1-9) and Diagnosis and Interpretation of Disease in Human Remains (chapters 10-16). Here I will review these chapters for their content and how they may be utilized by vertebrate palaeontologists.

• Read the entire review (PDF file)

B.L. Beatty about

The history of palaeontology tends to focus on Darwin, Cope and Marsh, or if someone is particularly scholarly, the Burgess Shale. But with the exception of studies on Darwin, few of these ever delve deeper in the broader meaning of the history of palaeontology in any Kuhnian paradigm shifting nature. That may be because palaeontology, despite all the excitement over new technologies and integrations with developmental biology, morphometrics or cladistics, is still largely dependant on classical methods – one needs to find and dig up the fossils, then identify and describe them, before much else can be done with them. Palaeontology had remained something of a “stamp-collecting” science, at least on a procedural basis as it was perceived, until the development of what most would call paleobiology. This book, edited by David Sepkoski and Michael Ruse, is a chronicle of the history of how paleobiology got “to the high table” in evolutionary biology. Perhaps most impressive, these editors managed to get these chapters together so cohesively, and by many of the original authors of seminal papers in what started in the early 1970s, including Raup, Bambach, Hallam, Sepkoski, and Valentine. It is unfortunate that Steven J. Gould and Jack Sepkoski and Tom Schopf did not live to contribute to this, but it is clear from the repeated focus on these individuals in the chapters by others that their influence is omnipresent despite their lack of authorship here.

• Read the entire review (PDF file)