CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
Menu
Research dossier · General Reference

Archaeoparasitology

study of parasites in archaeological contexts

Cross-disciplinary reference desk with index cards, atlas, dictionary and catalogue
General referenceInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionSep 9, 2026
Entity authorityQ618692 ↗
Source-derived summary

Archaeoparasitology, a multi-disciplinary field within paleopathology, is the study of parasites in archaeological contexts. It includes studies of the protozoan and metazoan parasites of humans in the past, as well as parasites which may have affected past human societies, such as those infesting domesticated animals.

Reinhard suggested that the term "archaeoparasitology" be applied to "... all parasitological remains excavated from archaeological contexts ... derived from human activity" and that "the term 'paleoparasitology' be applied to studies of nonhuman, paleontological material." (p. 233) Paleoparasitology includes all studies of ancient parasites outside of archaeological contexts, such as those found in amber, and even dinosaur parasites.

The first archaeoparasitology report described calcified eggs of Bilharzia haematobia (now Schistosoma haematobium) from the kidneys of an ancient Egyptian mummy. Since then, many fundamental archaeological questions have been answered by integrating our knowledge of the hosts, life cycles and basic biology of parasites, with the archaeological, anthropological and historical contexts in which they are found.

Parasitology basics

Parasites are organisms which live in close association with another organism, called the host, in which the parasite benefits from the association, to the detriment of the host. Many other kinds of associations may exist between two closely allied organisms, such as commensalism or mutualism.

Editorial summary

“Archaeoparasitology” enters the record as study of parasites in archaeological contexts. Crown Archives preserves that source wording while asking what Archaeoparasitology, study and parasites can confirm, complicate or overturn.

Editorial reviewA concise reference frame for defining the subject, testing terminology and identifying the institution closest to the evidence. The current 206-word lead offers orientation but no explicit four-digit date, so chronology should not be assumed. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. Its strongest next move is a source search built around Archaeoparasitology, study and parasites.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

“Archaeoparasitology” is worth following because a concise public description often conceals a longer documentary argument. Here, Archaeoparasitology, study and parasites provides the most credible route into that argument.

Evidence profile

The citation trail is more important than the brevity of the summary: it shows where individual claims can be examined in context. The source revision retrieved here is dated Sep 9, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q618692. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference.

Critical limits

A concise general-reference account can conceal disagreements about scope, terminology or the weight assigned to individual sources. The source lead contains qualifying language; that uncertainty should survive quotation, summary and reuse. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.

How to read it

Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.

Best used for
  • Subject orientation
  • Search vocabulary
  • Locating named sources
Verify next

The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “Archaeoparasitology”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow Archaeoparasitology primary sources, Archaeoparasitology archive and Archaeoparasitology research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Archaeoparasitology”?
  2. Which institution is responsible for the underlying evidence?
  3. What terminology or title could unlock a more precise catalogue search?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from “Archaeoparasitology” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.