Beth Singler is a PhD candidate in Theology and Religious Studies at the University of Cambridge.  Unlike the majority of PhDs in her faculty who are interested in long dead Theologians, difficult questions about the nature of god or translating dusty texts, Beth is researching contemporary religious movements online.  In particular her thesis is on the Indigo Children, an idea from what is often called the New Age Movement.

The seven chakras of the body are aligned - with coffee.

The seven chakras of the body are aligned – with coffee.

AA: So, tell us a little bit about your work:

BS: I’m very interested in New Religious Movements (NRMs), in particular those that have a strong online presence.  A lot of NRMs do now interact primarily online because their ideas might not be accepted by the mainstream, or indeed, they might be ridiculed for them, and the Internet enables people who self-identify in new ways to find each other.  For my PhD thesis I am looking at the Indigo Children who might not be entirely defined as a religious movement, but are definitely a new community of self-identifying people who communicate regularly through social media about their spiritual ideas.

AA: Okay, now you must know what the next question is going to be… what are ‘Indigo Children’?

BS: You surprise me! Briefly, the Indigo Children are seen by some as a special generation of children who started being born in the early 80s.  They were identified by a woman called Nancy Ann Tappe who claimed to be a synsthete (seeing colours instead of other sensory input) and a clairvoyant.  She said that she saw people’s “life colours” and that each one defined a progressive state in humankind’s evolution.  Others have taken Tappe’s idea and described Indigos and their problems further, as well as exploring new iterations such as Crystals, Rainbows, Dolphins, Blue Rays, Platinums, Angels on Earth, Starseeds, Beautiful Silent Ones, etc etc.  

Although called Indigo “Children”, Indigos can be small children, teenagers or adults.  And there are also those who were born prior to the 1980s who see themselves as Elder Indigos, or forerunners of the explosion in numbers (especially those who involved themselves with the counter-cultural revolution of the 1960s).  Many indidivuals don’t seem to know that they ARE Indigo Children until they come across the term online, or a friend mentions it, and then their difficulties with fitting into structures and systems suddenly make sense.  

AA: You mention that a lot of these individuals do not know they are ‘Indigos’. Is there a list of criteria or certain traits that identify them?

BS: Nancy Ann Tappe gave us a check-list of sorts for the traits of Indigo Children.  It has been elaborated upon by subsequent writers, and version proliferate online, but it serves as a starting point. I won’t quote all of it, but here are a few of the 8 points:

“•They are very intelligent, and very oriented toward their purpose on earth.

•They come into the world with a feeling of royalty (and often act like it).

•They often have lots of energy.”

The full list, and later versions, describe a combination of a sense of entitlement and social awkwardness that can be seen or diagnosed by others as behavioural problems or ‘special needs’, and Indigos may have problems fitting into society’s main structures such as education and the workplace.  Seeing Indigos as ‘problem children’ or ‘children who just don’t fit in’ arguably provides answers for both parents and those who begin to identify as Indigos in adulthood.  The former then have a reason for their child’s behavioural problems and can hold them up as ‘special’, and the latter also now have an explanation for their difficult or even traumatic childhood.  For both, finding the Indigo concept can be like a moment of revelation, or even conversion.  Many of the Indigos I have interviewed describe how reading about the Indigo Children was like finding out something that they knew all along, but had never had a name for before.

Beth Singler.

Beth Singler.

AA: What was it that interested you in particular about Indigo children? Why did you choose to focus on them for your research project?

I’m very interested in the adoption and adaption of established discourses and narratives for spiritual ends.  So in the case of the Indigo Children there is a mix of scientific theory, evolutionary theory, spiritualism, conspiricism and utopianism that picks up from more older sources.  Contemporary religion (or spirituality, and the difference is a part of a huge debate I can’t go into here) does seem to engage in more creative play with sources in the 20th and 21st Centuries.  And some of my other research is on more consciously ‘invented’ religions, to use Cusack’s (2010) term, such as Jediism and some more obscure online forms.

AA: I expect those who subscribe to this view of their children or themselves as Indigo face a lot of skepticism. (I’ll admit to being skeptical myself.) How do you approach your research on a subject like this, especially the interviews?

One of the first Indigos I interviewed asked me if I was just going to “call them all a ‘bunch of whackos’?”.  Well, apart from the fact that a one sentence PhD thesis is pretty rubbish, I happen to think that they are acting in an eminently rational way that humankind has used for centuries. You can call it at its basic level ‘making sense’, or to use a fancy religious studies idea, that they are creating theodicies, ideas produced in order to understand the presence of evil in the world.  Evil as in the problems that they face every day. Understanding where and how these ideas come about is far more interesting to me than whether they are right or not.

Also, as a social anthropologist it is never my place to interrogate the truth of person’s ‘making sense’. Personally, as what you might call a militant agnostic, I’d also say my mind is so open-minded I’m at risk of it falling out!

AA: If you could share one particular aspect of your research with others (so far) what would you want them to know about either New Age Movements, or Indigo children, or this type of research?

I think that the main aim of my work – which may seem surprising since I research these seemingly exotic evolved psychic children, Jedi, pagans, Scientologists and many other forms of online created spiritualities – is to show how mundane the rational processes they are engaging in actually are.  I propose that they are merely people being people to each other, for good or ill.

AA: Thank you so much for taking part in Penny University and sharing your research with everyone. I imagine there’s now going to be a Google stat spike in searched for ‘Indigo children’.

Beth Singler is a PhD student at the University of Cambridge specializing in the social anthropological study of New Religious Movements online. Combining traditional fieldwork with digital ethnography, Beth explores the new definitions of self that multiple on the Internet. Her PhD is on the Indigo Children, but she has also written about Wiccans, Jedi, Scientologists, pop-culture religions and various online subcultures. She has her own blog at and you can follow her on Twitter via @BVLSingler.

Raising the Medieval Dead (Not a Zombie Thing)

Right.  I am awfully apologetic if you have been pining for research related posts in the last few weeks.  If you haven’t been pining for research related posts in the last few weeks then surely the only explanation is that you must be new here – so welcome!  However, for those of you that missed it – we have terribly exciting news (which is what kept us busy for the last little while).  We’ve been given the go ahead for our live event at Manchester Science Festival 2013!  You can read more about the 21st Century Coffee House (and apply to take part) here.

But now that we are back to our regular programming, I am very excited to bring you the most recent Penny University featured interview.

Coffee house, charnel house, I can see how you could get the two mixed up!

Coffee house, charnel house, I can see how you could get the two mixed up!

Jennifer Crangle is a second year PhD student at the University of Sheffield in the Department of Archaeology.  She is investigating the post-depositional disturbances that occurred during the English medieval period.

AA: So, tell me a little bit about your research:

JC: Post-depositional practises were extensive throughout the medieval period (c.1066 – 1550), but are also evident in the periods both before and after. For the medieval period such activities include the creation of ossuaries/charnel chapels, and relics, the disturbance and emptying of existing graves and tombs, insertions of complete or disarticulated individuals into existing graves and tombs, box and bag reburials of disarticulated individuals, charnel pits and intercutting graves.  It has been thought that skeletal imagery and familiarity with disturbance of the dead became commonplace only after the Black Death in 1348.  The evidence so far, however, is demonstrating that reverence of human bones and their role within medieval religion was developing as early as the 7th century and continued to do so throughout the subsequent medieval period.  My research aims to bring to light this important and little understood medieval funerary rite.

AA: Okay, so let me get this straight.  You’re researching what people did with the dead during the Medieval period… after they were already buried?  I’ve heard of ossuaries before, but I thought they were created because of a lack of space.  From what you’re saying, it sounds like this might not be the case.

JC: Research to this point in England regarding ossuary creation has only focussed on the functional motivations involved, such as a requirement to empty a graveyard of existing skeletons in order to continue burying the dead in that location.  Interpretations of these site types – plus other categories of post-burial disturbance – tend to be purely functional.  This is what you and other people would have heard about before.  However, the liturgical or spiritual motivations and justifications for disinterring the skeletal dead are either minimalized or denied altogether by excavators, medievalists and osteoarchaeologists.  The frequency with which these activities occurred is also not recognised.  It is believed that the creation of ossuaries never really happened to any great extent in England and so the practise cannot be comparable to that of the rest of Europe.  The reality, in fact, proves the opposite; I have found evidence of the existence of over 60 medieval English ossuary sites. Furthermore, these sites clearly served roles in penance, confession, pilgrimage and functioned as chantry chapels did (these were private chapels in churches, built by wealthy families, where they paid a priest to say prayers for their souls).

AA:  Wow!  You mentioned a lot of different types of ‘post-depositional’ practices at the start of this interview, which suggests this was happening a lot.  Can you tell me a bit more about the types of practices?  Box and bag burials sound especially unusual!

JC: People tend to be surprised that post-depositional practices took place at all, let alone to the extent that they did.  People are also surprised that they were intrinsically liturgical!  As I mentioned, post-burial disturbance has been taking place throughout England from before the advent of Christianity in about the 7th century, right the way through the medieval period and into the post-medieval period (c.1550 onwards).  There are so many types of disturbance I won’t be able to go through them all here.  One of the earliest types of disturbance dating to the 8th century was the re-opening of an existing grave in order to insert a new burial.  The skeleton of the existing person was removed, the new person inserted, with the bones of the previous occupant/s placed or sometimes arranged around the new body.  In some places this happened up to 10 times in a single grave.  This also provides evidence about Anglo-Saxon Christian burial in general, for example, it proves that they knew where graves were located, who was in them, and how long they had been buried. 

From about the 7th century we also have the ‘box reburials’ I talked about – of single disarticulated individuals.  Bag reburials seem to be a totally different category or phenomenon – haven’t fully researched them and figured them out yet!  The box reburials represent the ‘translations’ of people deemed saintly due to the number of miracles attributed to this deceased person, which took place at their grave.  This justified the person to be disinterred in a specific ceremony; their bones were washed and placed in a box, which was itself placed into their original stone tomb or coffin which was also disinterred and brought inside a church.  The person was then revered as a saint with their tomb and translated remains becoming a shrine and relics.

AA: It seems our forebears were much more familiar with the dead than we are today – and maybe a lot more familiar than we thought they were!  Were you surprised that there was so much post-depositional activity happening in this period?

JC: Yes, a little!  I had previously researched ossuaries so knew a lot about them before I started my current research. And most archaeologists are familiar with charnel pits (deliberately dug pits in the ground to hold displaced bones within a graveyard) and intercutting graves!  I was surprised at the number and variety of post-depositional practices but even more so at the prevalence with which they are identifiable in the archaeological record.  Post-burial involvement with the dead was definitely ‘the norm’ as opposed to a rare occurrence.

AA: You said you’ve found over 60 ossuaries in England (so far).  Where (and what) exactly are they and why do you think they were lost or forgotten?

JC: An ‘ossuary’ is the most common term used to describe a place where human bones are stored, or to describe the collection of bones themselves.  ‘Charnel chapel’ is actually the official and original term for these places, as detailed in the foundation charters I’ve located, but colloquially within a few years of their construction, they were referred to as ossuaries, carnarium, bone stores, and charnel houses, amongst other names.  They are medieval ecclesiastic buildings, located within the confines of the cemetery of ecclesiastical complexes (including abbeys, cathedrals, hospitals, monasteries and parish churches).  They were constructed in England from the early 13th century to the Reformation in the mid-16th century but the height of construction occurred in the 1300’s.  They were built intentionally for the storage or curation of deliberately disinterred and disarticulated human skeletal elements and were intrinsically connected to prayer, penance and confession; this appears to have been the ‘real’ reason for their construction.  There are two forms of charnel chapel: free-standing, two-storeyed buildings and those built below churches. Both structural types primarily consist of a semi-subterranean vault or chamber, this was always where the bones were arranged/kept.  Free-standing examples had a chapel built directly on top of these partially underground chambers and in the majority of cases those charnel chapels built below churches were located under existing chapels within the church.

As they were intrinsically connected to pre-Reformation Catholic religion and theology, when the Reformation and its aftermath took place from the early 16th century, they were destroyed, emptied or re-used for secular purposes.  This is why their location, purpose or very existence is not known about, because the reverence of bones and the role of ossuaries/charnel chapels in society and faith was ceased, according to the new prevailing religion.  Due to this deliberate eradication of the physical structures and the inherent religious ideology, their original role and usage has been forgotten or misunderstood.

AA: Wow.  It sounds like your research has already discovered some things that may change how we think about this period of history – especially in England.  I can’t wait to hear more!  Will you come back once you’ve sussed out those bag reburials and other unusual practices to tell us more about them?

JC: Absolutely, I’d love to!  The medieval period in England is an extensively researched area of archaeology, yet there is clearly a large aspect of it that has basically gone unnoticed.  I guess that’s a reflection on the success of the Reformers at the Reformation.  The obligatory religious changes they imposed were so forceful that they have influenced our current understanding of England’s pre-Reformation medieval past.  The opinions we as archaeologists and the general public have regarding medieval religious ideology have essentially been shaped by Reformers acting nearly 500 years ago.  It’s only by questioning the established ‘facts’ and what we think we know, that the reality of medieval funerary practises can be recognised and understood.  It’s daunting, but I think it’s important, both to the discipline and to the medieval dead, that the reality of their post-depositional reverential practises are researched and recognised.

AA:  It’s been great having you here at Penny University.  Thanks so much for taking the time to tell us about your research.

JC: Thanks for listening/reading!

Jennifer Crangle is a PhD Candidate at the University of Sheffield.  Her PhD project is focussed on the post-depositional disturbances that occurred during the English medieval period.  If you’re interested in learning more about Jennifer and her research, you can actually visit a medieval ossuary, as described above.  Jennifer is organising /co-ordinating an open day at Rothwell Holy Trinity Church, Northamptonshire on 10th August.  It’s free to attend and includes crypt and ossuary tours by Jennifer, osteological sessions for children and adults, plus evening lectures on the subject of medieval post-depostional practises.  Further details can be obtained by emailing Jennifer directly; updates will also be posted on this Facebook group and the University of Sheffield Department of Archaeology website.

Caffeine on the Brain

We have had such a great response to Penny University and the interviews posted up so far.  Thanks!  We couldn’t have done it without you (honestly, it’d be a pretty lame endeavour if no one other than myself and the researchers were reading it – and the stats don’t lie: over 2050 views already).

At this point in time, now that we’re up and running (and summer is approaching), we are going to move from posting interviews weekly to biweekly.  However, if there is a call for it (perhaps say, when the new academic year roles around) then we will definitely consider switching back to weekly interview features.  Fifty-two inteviews in a year is a little daunting though!

But don’t despair!  The weeks in between our interview features Penny University will be posting all sort of other wonderful posts on a variety of research subjects.  We even have some guests posts lined up!  If there is a subject you think we should cover – or if you’d like to take part – then get in touch.

We also have one final exciting update.  Remember, Penny University LIVE?  Well, we’ve been in touch with organisers at Manchester Science Festival / other sneaky collaborators and it looks like our insane idea may be going ahead – so if you’d like to take part (or if you just want more information) then do let us know.


Warning: contents are hot

Welcome to back to Penny University!  If you haven’t check in during the last week, be sure to check the post Research Blogging to learn about a great service for finding blog posts on peer-reviewed research (<spoiler> we’ve been approved to use it </spoiler>).  Now, on to this week’s interview!

Wow, this sure is strong coffee. MAGNETICALLY STRONG!

Laura Roberts Artal is a PhD candidate at the University of Liverpool.  She is studying 3.5-3.2 Billion year old rocks in South Africa to see what they can tells us about what the Earth was like, relatively soon after its formation.

AA: So, tell me a little bit about your work:

LRA: I am interested in how the Earth’s magnetic field works and more importantly, what it can tell us about what the Earth might have been like soon after it formed.  The rocks I study come from the geological time period, called the Archean, a period of time from which we know very little about.  This is mainly due to the fact that very few rocks from that time still exist today.  Because they’ve been around for so long, they’ve also seen a fair bit of action: they’ve been buried to great depths, brought back to the surface; folded, tilted…you name it!  I am lucky to work with some rocks from NE South Africa, which haven’t been too badly affected by these processes.  From those, I’m hoping to gain information which might tell us more about how the Earth was all those billions of years ago: did plate tectonics exist as we know them today?  Did the interior of the Earth (the core) behave as it does now?  Were the conditions on Earth favourable for the first forms of life to start developing?

 AA: Wow, so you’re really digging into the history of the Earth, aren’t you (sorry for the pun)?  What exactly do you do with the rocks you study, in order to find more out about these processes that have occurred over time?

LRA: We need the samples we work with in the lab to be a standard shape and size.  Standard meaning:  1 inch in length and width and perfectly cylindrical.  So, we take a drill (not dissimilar to the ones used for DIY, just a little more powerful) out into the field and collect the samples.  Once back in the lab, we carry out a bunch of experiments to get as much information about the rocks as possible.  The main (and most time consuming) experiment I perform aims to find the original magnetic signature held within a sample.  To extract this information, I heat the sample up to 600°C, but in 16 heating steps.  We do this in an oven which is designed to cool very fast once it’s reached the desired temperature.  In between each heating step, I take the sample and measure it in a magnetometer, which essentially reads the magnetic information held in the rock.  The data is shown in a graph, which I then go off and interpret.  I would always do this experiment last, as the heating process, ultimately destroys all the information held within the sample.  If I wanted to run any other experiments on the sample, I’d do those first.

AA: What exactly does the repeated heating do to the sample that allows you to gain useful data from it?  Any why 16 steps, instead of 15 or 17?

LRA: So, I’ll try to keep this simple, but we are going to have to go into a little detail of how rocks hold magnetisation for me to be able to answer this question.

As a rock cools following its formation, the magnetic minerals within it align themselves with the local geomagnetic field.  The aim of most palaeomagnetic studies is to measure and interpret the components of natural remanent magnetisation (NRM).  A primary NRM is acquired during rock formation whilst a secondary NRM can be acquired subsequently; for example as a result of the rocks folding or being struck by lightning.

NRM = Primary NRM + Secondary NRM

Heating a rock to a temperature below its Curie Temperature (Tc= the temperature at which all ferrimagnetism is destroyed), then allowing it to cool in zero magnetic field, allows removal of the secondary NRM and isolation of the primary NRM component.  The primary NRM is what I am interested in, because it is the record of that really old magnetic signature that I am after!

Rock MagnetisationThe number of steps you carry out, really depends on the rocks (or materials) you are working with and what information you want for them.  In my case, the 16 steps are associated with this Tc that I talk about just above.  I need to heat my samples to at least 580ºC if I want to isolate the primary NRM and I need to have a number of detailed ‘ish’ steps at lower temperatures to be sure I will be able to see the secondary NRM also.

AA:  I think many of us will have heard about that fact that the Earth’s magnetic poles shift and in the past have actually been reversed – is this the type of information you are looking at in the rocks?

LRA: Yes, that is correct.  The Earth’s magnetic field poles are always on the move, via a process called True Polar wander.  Associated to that is another process called Apparent Polar Wander.  In addition, the poles can flip, which is a reversal of the magnetic field.  You’ve hit the nail on the head in your question; I am in fact looking for evidence for all of those, especially for a reversal.

AA:  That’s absolutely fascinating.  It’s especially interesting that you can isolate the primary NRM ‘just’ through heating and cooling, taking advantage of the properties of magnetism.  I had thought it would have been a far more complex process – although I am sure your simplified it for us in your description!  Since you’ve started your research have you come across any intriguing results you can share with us?

LRA: That’s a tricky one!  I have, but the problem with it is, I’ve not published them yet, so I need to be careful quite how much I tell you!  Despite that, I can give you a little taster.  Previous research has suggested that a magnetic field must have been active in the Archean, 3.5 Billion Years ago, and I’ve been able to confirm that through my research.  Just because you are able to isolate a primary NRM, it doesn’t mean it is as old as the rocks are.  I’ve been able to prove, through using geological evidence and some tests, that the magnetisation held in ‘my’ rocks, is in fact 3.5billion years old.

AA: Incredible.  Well, we won’t pester you for results (we wouldn’t want you to get in trouble), but maybe once you’re able you’ll come back and tell us a bit more about what you’ve learned?  It has been great having you here and it’s been very fun learning all about your research.

LRA: Thanks so much for having on Penny University, it’s been brilliant!  I hope I’ve inspired you to learn a little more about our planet and its magnetic field in particular!  If you want any extra information, don’t hesitate to get in touch, check out my details below.

Laura Rocks!

Laura, in South Africa, with something that is not a rock!

Laura Roberts Artal is a PhD candidate at the University of Liverpool.  She is studying 3.5-3.2 Billion year old rocks in South Africa.  If you’re interested in learning more about Laura and her research, you can follow her on Twitter at @lauRob85, visit, or check out the EGU blog network – for a number of guest blog posts about the Earth’s magnetic field.

One lump, or two?

Welcome back to Penny University!  In the week since our launch we have had a great response, with visitors coming to the site from every continent, except Antarctica!  [Come on Antarctica, where’s the love?]  We really appreciate everyone who has taken the time to read the posts and especially those who have helped to share them with the world.  You are all worthy additions to Team 1p!

I am delighted that I am able to bring you today’s interview, because I just know how much you’re going to enjoy it.  It’s like the exact opposite of pulling teeth!*

How do you make a tooth out of frothed milk?  Badly!  This week's latte art is at least recognisable.

Sugar in your coffee? Careful, it might just rot your teeth!

Linzi Harvey is a current PhD candidate in Archaeology at the University of Sheffield.  She is looking into the dental health of archaeological assemblages and how dental health might relate to overall health in a past population.

AA:  Hi Linzi, so, tell me a little bit about your work:

LH:  Currently I am writing up the results of my doctoral research, which has been an exploration into the relationship between dental health and overall or ‘systemic’ health in past populations.  In the last few years there has been a lot of clinical literature published and public interest in how conditions like gum disease might influence other diseases in the body, such as heart disease.  There appears to be a correlation between the two in modern populations, so my research was an attempt to see if that oral-systemic health link can be identified in past-populations.  However, having only skeletons to work with makes finding that link quite difficult!

AA:  That sounds incredibly interesting – and it’s very neat to think about modern medical science having an influence on how we might approach understanding health in the past.  But yes, how exactly do you go about studying the health of people (dental or otherwise) if you only have their skeletons?

LH:  The dental health is the easy bit – the teeth in a skeleton look pretty much the same as in a living person.  Teeth are different to bone because they do not remodel after periods of disease or trauma, leaving a permanent and very visible record of these things.  Even gum disease, which we can’t observe directly because skeletons lack soft tissue, can be assessed by looking at the condition of the underlying ‘alveolar’ bone of the jaw – the worse your gum disease, the more ragged-looking your bone will be.

The general health is a bit harder to get at, but I assessed it by looking at ‘non-specific indicators of physiological stress’, which included things like bone infections and developmental disturbances.  When viewed together, having these conditions might indicate your overall health was compromised.

AA:  Are you looking at any certain time period or group of people?

LH:  Although I’m primarily examining a Medieval assemblage, I’m not actually focusing on a particular time period.  This is because I’m investigating a relationship and a method, so any past population would essentially serve the same purpose for me.  Temporal differences in dental health can be interesting though – for example, the rates of tooth decay increased dramatically after the introduction of easily available sugar into Europe in the 17th century.

AA:  Oh, we’ll have to come back to that!  But now, on to the all important question: what have you found out?

LH:  I am still analysing my results, so I can’t reveal too much in case my statistical testing proves me wrong – but it looks like identifying a general relationship between dental and overall health in skeletons might be a bit too ambitious using the parameters I selected.  However, I did identify a relationship between periodontal (gum) disease and bone infection, which might point to an underlying susceptibility to these kinds of conditions in some people.  I hope to have a better idea of what’s going on, soon.

Ugh, icky (but scientifically useful) Medieval teeth.

Side view of the upper dentition of one of the individuals from the All Saint’s Fishergate assemblage. Note how decay in the second to last molar tooth has led to a large abscess forming at the root of the tooth.

AA:  Okay, so it sounds like you’ve got some interesting results from your research!  I won’t ask you to go into too much detail, but maybe we can check back once you’re finished with your results?  It would be interesting to learn more!

You mention differences in tooth decay over time.  Since you’re looking at early remains, are most of the teeth you look at in good condition or would a dentist today be horrified if someone turned up for an appointment with Medieval-era teeth?

LH:  I’ve seen dentists look at ancient teeth and let me tell you, they generally look horrified!  It’s primarily because ‘dental attrition’ or tooth wear was so much more extensive in the past – before modern food refining techniques, people tended  to get a lot more grit in their diet, with foods generally being a lot tougher.  This meant teeth wore down more severely than the present day.  These days, soft and processed foods mean less wear, but conversely, more decay.  You also have to bear in mind that the idea of restorative dentistry is fairly new – in the past, there was no option but extraction for a bad tooth, so missing teeth were the norm, which is less so the case now in most developed nations.

AA:  It’s intriguing to think that despite the level of dental care we now receive in some ways we are worse off (in terms of decay) because of our diet.  Still, I do think I prefer the look of a mouth filled with pearly whites to a smile with gaps and extreme tooth wear – but maybe that’s just my modern bias!  It has been great interviewing you Linzi and I look forward to hearing more about your research results in the future, but until then, can you let me know just one more thing?

If it turns out there is a link (even a small one) between some aspect of dental health as an indicator of overall health in an archaeological population, do you think this will change the way we look at disease in the past – or maybe how we approach studying disease in the past?

LH:  I think the most interesting thing I’ve discovered whilst doing my research is that teeth, when studied in detail, can reveal huge amounts of information about an individual and the population they belonged to.  I’ve found that teeth sometimes get a bit lost in reporting because there are lots of them and they are difficult to count quickly – but I hope that I can show with my work that we need to try and collect more data about them more often.

AA:  Again, it has been wonderful to have the opportunity to feature your work on Penny University, thank so much for taking the time to talk with me.

LH:  Thanks for having me!

Linzi Harvey is a PhD candidate in the Department of Archaeology at the University of Sheffield in England.  If you’re interested in learning more about Linzi and her research, you can visit her blog ‘Teething Problems’, which includes tooth based news from around the world and her experiences of undertaking a PhD.

In case you missed our other exciting announcement during the launch week, be sure to read the post about Penny University LIVE! and don’t forget that if you, or someone you know, would like your research featured on Penny University all you need to do is get in touch.