Geographical Variations in the Nature of Undeclared Work

Inspired by a stream of cultural economic geographical thought that has sought to deconstruct the view that monetary transactions are everywhere market-like and profit-motivated, this paper seeks to reread the nature of undeclared work. Conventionally, such work has been seen as epitomising unbridled profit-motivated market-like monetised exchange, and depictions of the geographical variations in its character have distinguished only between various types of profit-motivated informal employment in different area types. Drawing upon detailed empirical evidence from eleven deprived and affluent localities in urban and rural England, however, it is here displayed that universally portraying undeclared work as a form of profit-motivated informal employment over-simplifies and obscures its spatially variable nature and heterogeneous meanings. Although undeclared work in affluent locality types and urban areas is more likely to be market-like and conducted for profit-motivated purposes, undeclared work in deprived locality types and rural areas is revealed to be much more a form of mutual aid conducted for kin, neighbours and friends and embedded in non-market motives. The outcome is not only a refiguring of the geographical variations in the nature of undeclared work but also clear evidence of the need to investigate other mainstream economic spaces so as to explore further the heterogeneous and spatially variable nature of monetised transactions.     

A pilot compositional analysis of Nasca ceramics from the Kroeber collection

In this paper we report on Laser Ablation Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry (LA-ICP-MS) of a sample of ceramics from Nasca, Peru collected by Alfred Kroeber in the 1920’s and curated at the Field Museum of Natural History in Chicago. The analysis was conducted for two principal reasons: (1) to test the efficacy of LA-ICP-MS when compared to INAA; and (2) to evaluate samples that post-date Early Nasca (where focus has primarily been placed). We show here that LA-ICP-MS is a viable alternative to INAA, present some of the compositional variability in the Kroeber samples, and propose some explanations for this variability.     

An interpretation of mosses found in recent archaeological excavations

Recent archaeological excavations at Vindolanda, Northumberland and at York have uncovered considerable quantities of bryophytic material. The mosses are considered here not in terms of their value to the archaeologist as indicators of prevailing environmental conditions but from an ethnological viewpoint. There is strong reason to believe that the mosses at both sites were deliberately harvested in large quantities and employed mainly for their bedding, packing, insulatory and absorbent qualities.     

The distribution and provenance of archaeological obsidian in central and eastern Europe

The sources of archaeological obsidian in central and eastern Europe are briefly described and analyses of 48 samples from 10 of these sources in northeast Hungary and southeast Slovakia are reported. Instrumental Neutron Activation Analysis was used to determine 16 trace elements and two major elements. Principal Components Analysis supported by Discriminant Analysis showed seven analytical groups in these data. A total of 270 pieces of archaeological obsidian were assigned by Discriminant Analysis to three of the Carpathian source groups defined, the remaining four source groups not being represented in the archaeological record. The three source groups used are: (1) Szöllöske and Málá Toron?a in Slovakia (designated group Carpathian 1); (2) Csepegö Forrás, Tolcsva area, Olaszliszka and Erdöbénye in Hungary (Carpathian 2a); and (3) Erdöbénye (Carpathian 2b). Carpathian 2a and 2b type obsidians are both found at the re-deposited source of Erdöbénye. Carpathian obsidian was used most widely in Hungary, Slovakia and Romania, and also reached south to the Danube in Yugoslavia, west to Moravia, Austria and to the Adriatic near Trieste, and north to Poland. Carpathian 2a obsidian was used in the Aurignacian period, Carpathian 1 in the Gravettian and Mesolithic, and Carpathian 1, 2a and 2b in the Neolithic, when Carpathian 1 predominated and obsidian use was at its most intensive. Only Carpathian I type has been identified in the Copper and Bronze Ages. There is no evidence at present for any overlap between the Carpathian obsidian distribution and the distributions of the Near Eastern or Aegean sources, but there is an overlap with Mediterranean obsidian at the Neolithic site of Grotta Tartaruga in northeast Italy where Liparian and Carpathian 1 material were identified. The distribution of obsidian from the Carpathian sources is considered in terms of linear supply routes. Based on limited available evidence the supply zone is significantly smaller and the rate of fall-off with distance slightly lower than that reported for Near Eastern obsidians.