the archaeological record to provide the answers regarding the past. He highly relies on the archaeological record (ceramic styles, design) to determine information on identity, politics and interrelationships between the St. Lawrence Iroquoians and Huron-Wendat people.
Opinions in Place of Conclusions:
These are unsupported assertions which Gibbon (2014) suggests are opinions. Therefore, the following are opinions asserted in place of conclusions:
¬ Ramsden (2016:6) suggests that his interpretations of the group of 7 houses outside the Kirche site that were never enclosed represents a group of people that moved from outside the area looking to join the Kirche village. o This is Ramsden’s conclusion regarding the houses found outside the Kirche community, there is no evidence for this rather it is Ramden’s opinion about the houses located outside the community indicate.
¬ At the Benson site the use of the barred neck motif is part of the process of blending the St. Lawrence Iroquoians and Huron-Wendat styles (Ramsden 2016:12). o Ramsden (2016) …show more content…
Yes, there are a conclusion that I noticed in Ramsden (2009) article which serves as premise for another argument:
¬ [C] St. Lawrence Iroquoian immigrants brought with them European trade links which made House 10 a special and significant household at the Benson site [P] since only House 10 contains all three classes of artifacts such as European metal, St. Lawrence Iroquoian pottery and pipes (Ramsden 2009:306).
¬ [C] House 10 was considered a ‘progressive’ household [P] because St. Lawrence Iroquoian immigrants brought with them European trade links which made House 10 a special and significant household at the Benson site (Ramsden 2009:306). o Therefore, “St. Lawrence Iroquoian immigrants brought with them European trade links which made House 10 a special and significant household at the Benson site” serves both as a premise and a conclusion for two
Opinions in Place of Conclusions:
These are unsupported assertions which Gibbon (2014) suggests are opinions. Therefore, the following are opinions asserted in place of conclusions:
¬ Ramsden (2016:6) suggests that his interpretations of the group of 7 houses outside the Kirche site that were never enclosed represents a group of people that moved from outside the area looking to join the Kirche village. o This is Ramsden’s conclusion regarding the houses found outside the Kirche community, there is no evidence for this rather it is Ramden’s opinion about the houses located outside the community indicate.
¬ At the Benson site the use of the barred neck motif is part of the process of blending the St. Lawrence Iroquoians and Huron-Wendat styles (Ramsden 2016:12). o Ramsden (2016) …show more content…
Yes, there are a conclusion that I noticed in Ramsden (2009) article which serves as premise for another argument:
¬ [C] St. Lawrence Iroquoian immigrants brought with them European trade links which made House 10 a special and significant household at the Benson site [P] since only House 10 contains all three classes of artifacts such as European metal, St. Lawrence Iroquoian pottery and pipes (Ramsden 2009:306).
¬ [C] House 10 was considered a ‘progressive’ household [P] because St. Lawrence Iroquoian immigrants brought with them European trade links which made House 10 a special and significant household at the Benson site (Ramsden 2009:306). o Therefore, “St. Lawrence Iroquoian immigrants brought with them European trade links which made House 10 a special and significant household at the Benson site” serves both as a premise and a conclusion for two