Pub Date : 2019-07-03DOI: 10.1080/00293652.2019.1696395
S. Jackson, Joshua C. Wright, L. A. Brown
This paper explores possibilities for recognizing and analytically using culturally-specific understandings of artefacts and spaces at an ancient Maya archaeological site. In the case study that we present, we use Classic Maya material categories – derived from hieroglyphic texts – to re-envision our representations of artefactual distributions and accompanying interpretations. We take inspiration from countermapping as an approach that recognizes the positionality of spatial representations and makes space for multiple/alternative spatial perspectives. We present spatial analyses based on our work at the Classic Maya archaeological site of Say Kah, Belize, juxtaposing modern modes of visualizing the results of multiple seasons of excavations with visualizations that instead draw upon reconstructed elements of ancient inhabitants’ perspectives on the site, its spaces, and usages (based on information drawn from Classic Maya textual ‘property qualifiers’). We argue that even incomplete information, such as that available for archaeological contexts, allows us to reimagine past spatial perspectives and experiences. Furthermore, doing so represents a move towards inclusion that changes our understanding of sites in terms of ancient experience and usage. The outcome is a shifted perspective on the spaces of the site that decentres the modern, archaeological vision, accompanied by a more reflexive awareness of the processes we use to construct our interpretations. We end with larger reflections useful for archaeologists curious about translating these ideas to other cultural settings.
{"title":"Countermapping the Past: Reenvisioning Ancient Maya Spaces at Say Kah, Belize","authors":"S. Jackson, Joshua C. Wright, L. A. Brown","doi":"10.1080/00293652.2019.1696395","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00293652.2019.1696395","url":null,"abstract":"This paper explores possibilities for recognizing and analytically using culturally-specific understandings of artefacts and spaces at an ancient Maya archaeological site. In the case study that we present, we use Classic Maya material categories – derived from hieroglyphic texts – to re-envision our representations of artefactual distributions and accompanying interpretations. We take inspiration from countermapping as an approach that recognizes the positionality of spatial representations and makes space for multiple/alternative spatial perspectives. We present spatial analyses based on our work at the Classic Maya archaeological site of Say Kah, Belize, juxtaposing modern modes of visualizing the results of multiple seasons of excavations with visualizations that instead draw upon reconstructed elements of ancient inhabitants’ perspectives on the site, its spaces, and usages (based on information drawn from Classic Maya textual ‘property qualifiers’). We argue that even incomplete information, such as that available for archaeological contexts, allows us to reimagine past spatial perspectives and experiences. Furthermore, doing so represents a move towards inclusion that changes our understanding of sites in terms of ancient experience and usage. The outcome is a shifted perspective on the spaces of the site that decentres the modern, archaeological vision, accompanied by a more reflexive awareness of the processes we use to construct our interpretations. We end with larger reflections useful for archaeologists curious about translating these ideas to other cultural settings.","PeriodicalId":45030,"journal":{"name":"Norwegian Archaeological Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2019-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/00293652.2019.1696395","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49543081","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-07-03DOI: 10.1080/00293652.2019.1675752
J. Henriksen
Kunglig makt och samiska bosättingsmønster. Studier kring Väinö Tanners vinterbyteori (Royal Power and Sámi Settlement Patterns. Studies concerning Väinö Tanner’s Winter Camp Theory) is a multi-disciplinary historical-archaeological book written by Swedish archaeologist Thomas Wallerström, with contributions from palynologists Ulf Sägerström and Eva-Marie Nordström (chapters 3 and 4). The book is organised in four sections: the Introductory Section (Chapter 1); the Winter Camp Problem (Chapters 2–5); Royal Power in Swedish Lapland (Chapters 6 and 7); and Concluding Reflections (Chapter 8) (as translated to English in the Summary p. 313–322). According to Wallerström, the book focuses on the geographical area of ‘northern Scandinavia’ although ‘northern Fennoscandia with a focus on present-day northern Sweden’ would be more correct. The main objective of the book is a ‘critical investigation into the validity of the “Winter Camp Theory” formulated by the Finnish scholar Väinö Tanner’ (p. 5). The book is a result of a research project led by the author, where the Winter Camp Theory was central to the project’s main hypothesis and research questions. The project’s results seemed to contradict the basic premises of the theory and Wallerström thus positions himself as an apostate to the Winter Camp Theory in the introduction. Wallerström considers the effects of the implementations of royal supremacy (‘the state’) in the north during the early modern period as an alternative and more promising path of inquiry (Chapter 1). The Winter Camp Theory is ascribed to Väinö Tanner and his synthesis of eastern Sámi societies (‘Skolt Laps’) in his cultural-geographical studies of the Petsamo district (Tanner 1929). Tanner’s theory is presented in the Introduction, and scrutinised in detail in Chapter 2. According to Tanner, the winter camp was essential to the eastern Sámi. While otherwise extensively dispersed in base camps in the siidas’ geographical area during the spring, summer and autumn seasons, all households belonging to the siida gathered in nucleated settlements during the four winter months, from late December to late March/early April. The eastern Sámi winter camp was the arena where the norraz, an assembly of family elders with a formal leader, decided legal matters and siida policies. The settlement pattern and societal organisation of the eastern Sámi in the 1920s were considered to be the last, decaying relict of an ancient pan-Sámi way of life. Tanner claimed that his synthesis gave insight into Sámi societies untarnished by influence of the modern national states. He also claimed that similar societies had existed in all parts of Sápmi. Wallerström’s investigation was carried out as a review of the Winter Camp Theory’s genealogy, its subsequent history of impact on the scientific study of Sámi (pre-) history, as well as being an assessment of the theory’s overall validity (Section 1 and 2). Sections 3 and 4 are devoted to Wallerström’s own cas
Kunglig makt och samiska bosättingsmønster。Studier kring VäinöTanners vinterbytori（王室权力和萨米人定居模式。关于VänöTanner冬令营理论的研究）是瑞典考古学家Thomas Wallerström撰写的一本多学科历史考古书籍，由孢粉学家Ulf Sägerström和Eva Marie Nordström贡献（第3章和第4章）。本书分为四个部分：引言部分（第一章）；冬令营问题（第2-5章）；瑞典拉普兰的王权（第6章和第7章）；和《结论性思考》（第8章）（见第313-322页摘要中的英译本）。根据Wallerström的说法，这本书关注的是“斯堪的纳维亚北部”的地理区域，尽管“芬诺斯坎迪亚北部，关注现在的瑞典北部”会更正确。本书的主要目的是“对芬兰学者VäinöTanner提出的“冬令营理论”的有效性进行批判性调查”（第5页）。这本书是作者领导的一个研究项目的成果，其中冬令营理论是该项目的主要假设和研究问题的核心。该项目的结果似乎与该理论的基本前提相矛盾，因此沃勒斯特罗姆在引言中将自己定位为冬令营理论的叛教者。Wallerström认为，现代早期在北方实施王室至上主义（“国家”）的影响是一种替代性的、更有前景的调查途径（第1章）。夏令营理论被认为是VäinöTanner和他在Petsamo地区的文化地理研究中对东部萨米社会的综合（“Kolt Laps”）（Tanner 1929）。Tanner的理论在引言中介绍，并在第二章中详细阐述。根据Tanner的说法，冬令营对萨米东部地区至关重要。尽管在春季、夏季和秋季期间广泛分散在锡伊达地理区域的大本营，但在12月底至3月底/4月初的四个冬季月份，锡伊达的所有家庭都聚集在有核的定居点。萨米东部冬令营是norraz的舞台，norraz是一个由正式领导人组成的家庭长老大会，在这里决定法律事务和siida政策。20世纪20年代，东部萨米人的定居模式和社会组织被认为是古代泛萨米人生活方式的最后一个腐朽遗迹。坦纳声称，他的综合作品深入了解了未受现代民族国家影响的萨米社会。他还声称，类似的社会在萨米的各个地区都存在。Wallerström的调查是对冬令营理论谱系的回顾，它对萨米（前）历史科学研究的后续影响历史，以及对该理论总体有效性的评估（第1和第2节）。第3节和第4节专门介绍了Wallerström自己的案例研究，其中冬令营理论或多或少被宣布无效。Tanner的“冬令营理论”在一定程度上是在与瑞典波兰学家K.B.Wiklund于1922年提出的观点的对话中提出的（第53页）。芬兰历史学家和民族学家Helmer Tegengren于1952年在今天的芬兰发表了他关于“已灭绝”的Kemi Lappmark siidas的开创性著作。他的历史重建隐含地依赖于坦纳的冬令营模型，尽管他几乎没有必要提及坦纳（第65页）。Wallerström对该理论谱系的描述集中在这三个关键阶段，Wiklunds粗略
{"title":"Kunglig makt och samiska bosättingsmønster. Studier kring Väinö Tanners vinterbyteori","authors":"J. Henriksen","doi":"10.1080/00293652.2019.1675752","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00293652.2019.1675752","url":null,"abstract":"Kunglig makt och samiska bosättingsmønster. Studier kring Väinö Tanners vinterbyteori (Royal Power and Sámi Settlement Patterns. Studies concerning Väinö Tanner’s Winter Camp Theory) is a multi-disciplinary historical-archaeological book written by Swedish archaeologist Thomas Wallerström, with contributions from palynologists Ulf Sägerström and Eva-Marie Nordström (chapters 3 and 4). The book is organised in four sections: the Introductory Section (Chapter 1); the Winter Camp Problem (Chapters 2–5); Royal Power in Swedish Lapland (Chapters 6 and 7); and Concluding Reflections (Chapter 8) (as translated to English in the Summary p. 313–322). According to Wallerström, the book focuses on the geographical area of ‘northern Scandinavia’ although ‘northern Fennoscandia with a focus on present-day northern Sweden’ would be more correct. The main objective of the book is a ‘critical investigation into the validity of the “Winter Camp Theory” formulated by the Finnish scholar Väinö Tanner’ (p. 5). The book is a result of a research project led by the author, where the Winter Camp Theory was central to the project’s main hypothesis and research questions. The project’s results seemed to contradict the basic premises of the theory and Wallerström thus positions himself as an apostate to the Winter Camp Theory in the introduction. Wallerström considers the effects of the implementations of royal supremacy (‘the state’) in the north during the early modern period as an alternative and more promising path of inquiry (Chapter 1). The Winter Camp Theory is ascribed to Väinö Tanner and his synthesis of eastern Sámi societies (‘Skolt Laps’) in his cultural-geographical studies of the Petsamo district (Tanner 1929). Tanner’s theory is presented in the Introduction, and scrutinised in detail in Chapter 2. According to Tanner, the winter camp was essential to the eastern Sámi. While otherwise extensively dispersed in base camps in the siidas’ geographical area during the spring, summer and autumn seasons, all households belonging to the siida gathered in nucleated settlements during the four winter months, from late December to late March/early April. The eastern Sámi winter camp was the arena where the norraz, an assembly of family elders with a formal leader, decided legal matters and siida policies. The settlement pattern and societal organisation of the eastern Sámi in the 1920s were considered to be the last, decaying relict of an ancient pan-Sámi way of life. Tanner claimed that his synthesis gave insight into Sámi societies untarnished by influence of the modern national states. He also claimed that similar societies had existed in all parts of Sápmi. Wallerström’s investigation was carried out as a review of the Winter Camp Theory’s genealogy, its subsequent history of impact on the scientific study of Sámi (pre-) history, as well as being an assessment of the theory’s overall validity (Section 1 and 2). Sections 3 and 4 are devoted to Wallerström’s own cas","PeriodicalId":45030,"journal":{"name":"Norwegian Archaeological Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2019-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/00293652.2019.1675752","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44049342","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-07-03DOI: 10.1080/00293652.2019.1669699
M. Nosch
This collaboratively written volume (Lise Bender Jørgensen, Joanna Sofaer, and Marie Louise Stig Sørensen, with contributions by Grahame Appleby, SebastianBecker, SophieBergerbrant, SarahCoxon, Sølvi Helene Fossøy, Karina Grömer, Flemming Kaul, Darko Maricevic, Sanjin Mihelic, Antoinette Rast-Eicher, and Helga Rösel-Mautendorfer) explores the nature of creativity during the European Bronze Age by looking at developments in three significant categories of objects: pottery, textiles and metalwork. The volume introduces a series of innovative themes focusing on aspects of materiality, aesthetics, training and learning, cosmology, and technological change and innovation. The importance and interest of the topic are very broad. The discipline of archaeology is in these years fuelled by more archaeological data, by new stimulating theories, and by newmethods from the natural sciences to explore the archaeological items. However, these developments are often compartmentalised within each find category, and are rarely related to each other in scholarly discussions. It is to the volume’s great merit that it combines the categories pottery, metalwork and textiles in such a comprehensive way that the reader can truly see the developments and communalities across crafts. The overall design, structure and organization strongly strengthens the cross-disciplinarity of the entire research project, and makes the volume an extremely stimulating read. It is divided into three parts. Each part consists of an individual or coauthored papers on very specific case studies or topics of textiles, pottery or metalwork, and in each part, the three main authors first introduce the theme and conclude by reflections. In Part I: Raw materials: Creativity and the Properties ofMaterials, archaeological investigations are combined with new analytical methods from the natural sciences; Part II: Production Practices draws in research from experimental archaeology and from social anthropology;Part III: Effects: Shape,Motifs, Pattern, Colour, and Texture, highlights and discusses specific features such as certain recurring motifs and their potential cosmological meaning, or decorative effects and their technical explanations. The research in this anthology stems from a HERA project, awarded by the Creative Europe of the EUCommission in a highly competitive international call and peer-reviewed by experts. This is also a great quality of the book, because it does not simply rely on an occasional collaboration or a conference; the authors have worked together in a shared project for several years and this has matured the book and its conclusions considerably, and has resulted in a concise and coherent work. The achievement of the volume is that it has truly embedded interdisciplinarity in the structure of the book, in each chapter, even into the introduction of each section. It appears as a text written conjointly, by the three editors and the many expert authors in a continual dialogue
这本合作撰写的书（Lise Bender Jørgensen、Joanna Sofaer和Marie Louise Stig Sørensen，Grahame Appleby、SebastianBecker、Sophie Bergerbrant、SarahCoxon、Sølvi Helene Fossøy、Karina Grömer、Flemming Kaul、Darko Maricevic、Sanjin Miheli、Antoinette Rast Eicher和Helga Rösel Mautendorfer的贡献）探讨了欧洲青铜时期创造力的本质通过观察陶器、纺织品和金属制品这三类重要物品的发展来了解时代。该卷介绍了一系列创新主题，重点是物质性、美学、训练和学习、宇宙学以及技术变革和创新。这个话题的重要性和兴趣非常广泛。近年来，考古学科受到更多考古数据、新的刺激性理论和自然科学探索考古项目的新方法的推动。然而，这些发展往往被划分在每个发现类别中，在学术讨论中很少相互关联。这本书的巨大优点在于，它以一种全面的方式将陶器、金属制品和纺织品这三个类别结合在一起，让读者能够真正看到各种工艺的发展和共同点。整体设计、结构和组织有力地加强了整个研究项目的跨学科性，使该卷成为一本极具刺激性的读物。它分为三个部分。每一部分都由一篇关于纺织品、陶器或金属制品的特定案例研究或主题的个人或合著论文组成，在每一部分中，三位主要作者首先介绍主题，并通过思考得出结论。在第一部分：原材料：创造力和材料的性质中，考古调查与自然科学的新分析方法相结合；第二部分：生产实践借鉴了实验考古学和社会人类学的研究成果；第三部分：效果：形状、主题、图案、颜色和纹理，强调并讨论了特定的特征，如某些重复出现的主题及其潜在的宇宙学意义，或装饰效果及其技术解释。这本选集中的研究源于一个HERA项目，该项目由欧盟委员会的创意欧洲在竞争激烈的国际电话会议上授予，并由专家进行同行评审。这也是这本书的一个伟大品质，因为它不仅仅依赖于偶尔的合作或会议；几年来，作者们在一个共同的项目中合作，这使本书及其结论相当成熟，并形成了一部简洁连贯的作品。这本书的成就在于，它真正将跨学科性嵌入了书的结构、每一章，甚至每一节的引言中。它是由三位编辑和许多专家作者在持续的对话和讨论中共同撰写的文本。在太多的合作项目中，目的是跨学科分享知识和工作，但在最终出版物中，每个学者都写下了自己的章节。这里的情况并非如此。即使是在单独撰写的章节中，也有很大的努力将结果和想法纳入理解所有三个领域创造力的整体范围，而不仅仅是在相似性和差异性方面。例如，在陶器和纺织品专家（Joanna Sofaer、Sarah Coxon、Karina Grömer、Sanjin Miheli）合著的关于Litzenkeramik的一章（第275–284页）中，这种一致的整合确实令人印象深刻。他们调查了
{"title":"Creativity in the Bronze Age. Understanding Innovation in Pottery, Textile, and Metalwork Production","authors":"M. Nosch","doi":"10.1080/00293652.2019.1669699","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00293652.2019.1669699","url":null,"abstract":"This collaboratively written volume (Lise Bender Jørgensen, Joanna Sofaer, and Marie Louise Stig Sørensen, with contributions by Grahame Appleby, SebastianBecker, SophieBergerbrant, SarahCoxon, Sølvi Helene Fossøy, Karina Grömer, Flemming Kaul, Darko Maricevic, Sanjin Mihelic, Antoinette Rast-Eicher, and Helga Rösel-Mautendorfer) explores the nature of creativity during the European Bronze Age by looking at developments in three significant categories of objects: pottery, textiles and metalwork. The volume introduces a series of innovative themes focusing on aspects of materiality, aesthetics, training and learning, cosmology, and technological change and innovation. The importance and interest of the topic are very broad. The discipline of archaeology is in these years fuelled by more archaeological data, by new stimulating theories, and by newmethods from the natural sciences to explore the archaeological items. However, these developments are often compartmentalised within each find category, and are rarely related to each other in scholarly discussions. It is to the volume’s great merit that it combines the categories pottery, metalwork and textiles in such a comprehensive way that the reader can truly see the developments and communalities across crafts. The overall design, structure and organization strongly strengthens the cross-disciplinarity of the entire research project, and makes the volume an extremely stimulating read. It is divided into three parts. Each part consists of an individual or coauthored papers on very specific case studies or topics of textiles, pottery or metalwork, and in each part, the three main authors first introduce the theme and conclude by reflections. In Part I: Raw materials: Creativity and the Properties ofMaterials, archaeological investigations are combined with new analytical methods from the natural sciences; Part II: Production Practices draws in research from experimental archaeology and from social anthropology;Part III: Effects: Shape,Motifs, Pattern, Colour, and Texture, highlights and discusses specific features such as certain recurring motifs and their potential cosmological meaning, or decorative effects and their technical explanations. The research in this anthology stems from a HERA project, awarded by the Creative Europe of the EUCommission in a highly competitive international call and peer-reviewed by experts. This is also a great quality of the book, because it does not simply rely on an occasional collaboration or a conference; the authors have worked together in a shared project for several years and this has matured the book and its conclusions considerably, and has resulted in a concise and coherent work. The achievement of the volume is that it has truly embedded interdisciplinarity in the structure of the book, in each chapter, even into the introduction of each section. It appears as a text written conjointly, by the three editors and the many expert authors in a continual dialogue","PeriodicalId":45030,"journal":{"name":"Norwegian Archaeological Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2019-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/00293652.2019.1669699","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49601132","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-07-03DOI: 10.1080/00293652.2019.1669700
Elna Siv Kristoffersen
Sösdala is no longer just a style – not after the publication of the three early fifth century, spectacular depositions Sösdala I–II and Fulltofta from the central part of Scania. The 17 chapters, followed by summary and captions in Russian, are written by 15 authors from five different countries. Extensive catalogues and illustrations support the text, and the high-quality photos invite us into the book. Informative reconstructions of bridles and saddles make the discussions of the many mounts easier to follow. The concluding chapter 17, written by the editors, works well as an introduction to the book. In chapter 1 Charlotte Fabech presents a comprehensive study on the ‘rescue, musealisation and oblivion’ of the Sösdala and Fulltofta finds. Ulf Näsman deals with the research history of the Sösdala style in chapter 5, discussing chronology as well as its relation to Late Roman provincial art and the Nydam style. Anna Bitner-Wroblewska (chapter 12) prefers the concept ‘Sösdala horizon’ and incorporates ceremonial horse bridles, shieldshaped, bi-conical and pelta-shaped pendants and silver sheet brooches covered by an elaborate and varied stamped ornamentation, shallow chip-carving and niello inlay.
{"title":"The Søsdala Horsemen and the Equestrian Elite of Fifth Century Europe","authors":"Elna Siv Kristoffersen","doi":"10.1080/00293652.2019.1669700","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00293652.2019.1669700","url":null,"abstract":"Sösdala is no longer just a style – not after the publication of the three early fifth century, spectacular depositions Sösdala I–II and Fulltofta from the central part of Scania. The 17 chapters, followed by summary and captions in Russian, are written by 15 authors from five different countries. Extensive catalogues and illustrations support the text, and the high-quality photos invite us into the book. Informative reconstructions of bridles and saddles make the discussions of the many mounts easier to follow. The concluding chapter 17, written by the editors, works well as an introduction to the book. In chapter 1 Charlotte Fabech presents a comprehensive study on the ‘rescue, musealisation and oblivion’ of the Sösdala and Fulltofta finds. Ulf Näsman deals with the research history of the Sösdala style in chapter 5, discussing chronology as well as its relation to Late Roman provincial art and the Nydam style. Anna Bitner-Wroblewska (chapter 12) prefers the concept ‘Sösdala horizon’ and incorporates ceremonial horse bridles, shieldshaped, bi-conical and pelta-shaped pendants and silver sheet brooches covered by an elaborate and varied stamped ornamentation, shallow chip-carving and niello inlay.","PeriodicalId":45030,"journal":{"name":"Norwegian Archaeological Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2019-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/00293652.2019.1669700","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48621273","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-07-03DOI: 10.1080/00293652.2019.1697355
C. Frieman, A. Teather, Chelsea W. Morgan
Normative notions of sex and gender were prevalent in discussion of European prehistoric societies until the last quarter of the 20th century. The progressive work that challenged a binary approach, published particularly in the 1990s, created an anticipation for further nuanced interpretation. This paper argues that, in contrast to this expectation, there was a surprising return to narrating a past of binary sex and gender. Societal roles have continued to be imagined as formalised through structures based on biological sex, with men seen as active mobile agents, while women were passive and static homemakers. We argue that not only is this unhelpful, the archaeological evidence renders it incorrect. We highlight the inherent conflicts in the data to show that investigating sex and gender in the past is difficult with imperfect and complex archaeological evidence. It requires careful and deliberate consideration to avoid normative explanations. In conclusion, we propose that investigating mobility is a particularly effective topic for examining past gendered societal roles.
{"title":"Bodies in Motion: Narratives and Counter Narratives of Gendered Mobility in European Later Prehistory","authors":"C. Frieman, A. Teather, Chelsea W. Morgan","doi":"10.1080/00293652.2019.1697355","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00293652.2019.1697355","url":null,"abstract":"Normative notions of sex and gender were prevalent in discussion of European prehistoric societies until the last quarter of the 20th century. The progressive work that challenged a binary approach, published particularly in the 1990s, created an anticipation for further nuanced interpretation. This paper argues that, in contrast to this expectation, there was a surprising return to narrating a past of binary sex and gender. Societal roles have continued to be imagined as formalised through structures based on biological sex, with men seen as active mobile agents, while women were passive and static homemakers. We argue that not only is this unhelpful, the archaeological evidence renders it incorrect. We highlight the inherent conflicts in the data to show that investigating sex and gender in the past is difficult with imperfect and complex archaeological evidence. It requires careful and deliberate consideration to avoid normative explanations. In conclusion, we propose that investigating mobility is a particularly effective topic for examining past gendered societal roles.","PeriodicalId":45030,"journal":{"name":"Norwegian Archaeological Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2019-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/00293652.2019.1697355","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45469799","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-07-03DOI: 10.1080/00293652.2019.1691253
Ingar Figenschau
Since the concept of sustainability (or sustainable development) became famous through its adoption in the UN’s report, ‘Our Common Future’ in 1987, it has travelled widely to become a global and omnipresent key concept also in the field of heritage. The inclusion into this field was facilitated by the understanding of heritage as resource, which has become the norm within cultural heritage management discourses and strategies. This understanding is increasingly sustained by an associated vocabulary of concepts that promote cultural heritage sites as economically and socio-politically beneficial, emphasising their value as resources for us. This paper explores what happens when this conceptual repertoire of resource thinking is applied to WWII Wehrmacht sites in northern Norway, a heritage that previously has been othered and excluded. How does it impact on the understanding of this particular heritage and how may it be challenged and transformed through encounters with an unruly heritage that potentially defies and distances such conceptualisation?
{"title":"The Heritage of War and the Discourse of Sustainability","authors":"Ingar Figenschau","doi":"10.1080/00293652.2019.1691253","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00293652.2019.1691253","url":null,"abstract":"Since the concept of sustainability (or sustainable development) became famous through its adoption in the UN’s report, ‘Our Common Future’ in 1987, it has travelled widely to become a global and omnipresent key concept also in the field of heritage. The inclusion into this field was facilitated by the understanding of heritage as resource, which has become the norm within cultural heritage management discourses and strategies. This understanding is increasingly sustained by an associated vocabulary of concepts that promote cultural heritage sites as economically and socio-politically beneficial, emphasising their value as resources for us. This paper explores what happens when this conceptual repertoire of resource thinking is applied to WWII Wehrmacht sites in northern Norway, a heritage that previously has been othered and excluded. How does it impact on the understanding of this particular heritage and how may it be challenged and transformed through encounters with an unruly heritage that potentially defies and distances such conceptualisation?","PeriodicalId":45030,"journal":{"name":"Norwegian Archaeological Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2019-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/00293652.2019.1691253","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49020414","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-07-03DOI: 10.1080/00293652.2019.1705890
S. Jackson, Joshua C. Wright, L. A. Brown
We are very appreciative of Patricia McAnany’s and Sarah Newman’s responses to our article. Their thoughtful comments challenge us to clarify and extend our thinking on this topic. Additionally, the meaningful intersections between our work and McAnany’s and Newman’s significant research contributions to the field of Maya studies point towards several important areas that need to be grappled with further. In our reply, we focus on three thematic areas, while also incorporating specific responses to some (though, for reasons of space, not all) of the comments and critiques raised by McAnany and Newman. We organize our response around three vignettes. These brief scenes provide openings for discussion of issues raised by the commenters, related to three questions: Are we ‘countermapping’ in the sense that it is widely understood? To what extent does our undertaking successfully frame dynamic, relational, or multiple knowledge in productive, non-binary ways? And, how do we position the impact of this work, and, in particular, our methodological choices? 1. WHAT ARE WE DOING?
{"title":"‘All those Rocks….were Talking to Each Other’: Three Scenes of Archaeologists at Work","authors":"S. Jackson, Joshua C. Wright, L. A. Brown","doi":"10.1080/00293652.2019.1705890","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00293652.2019.1705890","url":null,"abstract":"We are very appreciative of Patricia McAnany’s and Sarah Newman’s responses to our article. Their thoughtful comments challenge us to clarify and extend our thinking on this topic. Additionally, the meaningful intersections between our work and McAnany’s and Newman’s significant research contributions to the field of Maya studies point towards several important areas that need to be grappled with further. In our reply, we focus on three thematic areas, while also incorporating specific responses to some (though, for reasons of space, not all) of the comments and critiques raised by McAnany and Newman. We organize our response around three vignettes. These brief scenes provide openings for discussion of issues raised by the commenters, related to three questions: Are we ‘countermapping’ in the sense that it is widely understood? To what extent does our undertaking successfully frame dynamic, relational, or multiple knowledge in productive, non-binary ways? And, how do we position the impact of this work, and, in particular, our methodological choices? 1. WHAT ARE WE DOING?","PeriodicalId":45030,"journal":{"name":"Norwegian Archaeological Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2019-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/00293652.2019.1705890","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47242649","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-07-03DOI: 10.1080/00293652.2019.1692063
P. McAnany
Are we countermapping here? Can the overlay of hieroglyphic ‘property qualifiers’ onto distributions of materials and structural features derived from archaeological excavation at a Late Classic Maya site be considered a shake-up of normative methods of cartographic representation? While most countermapping efforts focus on landscape cognition of under-represented groups – and often are linked to Indigenous land claims or statements of landscape sovereignty (e.g. Wainwright and Bryan 2009, McAnany et al. 2015) – this claim to countermapping is entirely a projection onto the past. The pronounced reflexivity of countermapping efforts among geographers – whether it empowers or harms local peoples, whether it is a genderdiscriminatory process, or whether it creates boundaries where none previously existed – is absent from this study. Yet, this application of hieroglyphic ‘property qualifiers’ arguably does move towards common ground with what Johnson et al. (2006) refer to as critical cartographic literacy, which is a transmodern approach to cartography that is mindful of the call to critical consciousness issued by educator Paolo Freire blended with a desire to grapple with the colonialities of Western cartography, all the while forefronting Indigenous cartographies and ontologies. This brings us to the question of what an Indigenous cartography of Late Classic Maya communities may have felt and looked like and whether this study begins to approximate it? Globally, most archaeological research takes place in contexts that are ‘text free’ in the sense that there are no documentary sources – be they Indigenous writing systems, European chronicles, or other sources of information – against which archaeological materials can be examined. Ever since the decipherment of Classic hieroglyphic texts began to mature in the 1990s, hieroglyphs have provided extraordinarily rich insight on many facets of royal existence, including politics, dynastic histories, and social difference. Probing deeper, Stephen Houston et al. (2009) used texts and iconography to explore the aesthetics of colour and later Classic Maya relationality (Houston 2014), and finally the privileged position of young royal males who are both subject and agent of much that is glossed as Classic Maya society (Houston 2018). From this research and that of many others, we glimpse the decidedly ‘royal male gaze’ that is the positionality of the hieroglyphic record, which gives one pause about universalizing that gaze to all sectors of Late Classic society. Maya hieroglyphic texts contain nothing that approaches social history; the royal court was the be all and end all. For places that did not support a scribe who painted or carved in a durable medium there is scant mention in texts that are preserved in stone, pottery, or stucco at royal courts. Nor is there reference to the thousands of COMMENT
{"title":"Claims to Countermapping at Say Kah, Belize","authors":"P. McAnany","doi":"10.1080/00293652.2019.1692063","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00293652.2019.1692063","url":null,"abstract":"Are we countermapping here? Can the overlay of hieroglyphic ‘property qualifiers’ onto distributions of materials and structural features derived from archaeological excavation at a Late Classic Maya site be considered a shake-up of normative methods of cartographic representation? While most countermapping efforts focus on landscape cognition of under-represented groups – and often are linked to Indigenous land claims or statements of landscape sovereignty (e.g. Wainwright and Bryan 2009, McAnany et al. 2015) – this claim to countermapping is entirely a projection onto the past. The pronounced reflexivity of countermapping efforts among geographers – whether it empowers or harms local peoples, whether it is a genderdiscriminatory process, or whether it creates boundaries where none previously existed – is absent from this study. Yet, this application of hieroglyphic ‘property qualifiers’ arguably does move towards common ground with what Johnson et al. (2006) refer to as critical cartographic literacy, which is a transmodern approach to cartography that is mindful of the call to critical consciousness issued by educator Paolo Freire blended with a desire to grapple with the colonialities of Western cartography, all the while forefronting Indigenous cartographies and ontologies. This brings us to the question of what an Indigenous cartography of Late Classic Maya communities may have felt and looked like and whether this study begins to approximate it? Globally, most archaeological research takes place in contexts that are ‘text free’ in the sense that there are no documentary sources – be they Indigenous writing systems, European chronicles, or other sources of information – against which archaeological materials can be examined. Ever since the decipherment of Classic hieroglyphic texts began to mature in the 1990s, hieroglyphs have provided extraordinarily rich insight on many facets of royal existence, including politics, dynastic histories, and social difference. Probing deeper, Stephen Houston et al. (2009) used texts and iconography to explore the aesthetics of colour and later Classic Maya relationality (Houston 2014), and finally the privileged position of young royal males who are both subject and agent of much that is glossed as Classic Maya society (Houston 2018). From this research and that of many others, we glimpse the decidedly ‘royal male gaze’ that is the positionality of the hieroglyphic record, which gives one pause about universalizing that gaze to all sectors of Late Classic society. Maya hieroglyphic texts contain nothing that approaches social history; the royal court was the be all and end all. For places that did not support a scribe who painted or carved in a durable medium there is scant mention in texts that are preserved in stone, pottery, or stucco at royal courts. Nor is there reference to the thousands of COMMENT","PeriodicalId":45030,"journal":{"name":"Norwegian Archaeological Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2019-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/00293652.2019.1692063","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49529226","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-07-03DOI: 10.1080/00293652.2019.1670250
P. Henriksen, Sandie Holst, H. Breuning‐madsen
The National Museum of Denmark and the Department of Geography at the University of Copenhagen have collaborated on a project investigating burial mounds near early Medieval churches. The aim was to identify a possible continuity in cult sites across the shift to Christianity in the late Viking Age. Charcoal samples from 18 mounds were radiocarbon dated but the results showed they were far older than expected. Control dating undertaken on burial mounds of known age confirmed that charcoal in the mound fill can at least be up to 3000 years older than the mound itself. As charcoal can survive in the surface soil layer for millennia, in spite of ploughing, bioturbation and frost, it may also dominate the charcoal pool of the grass or heather turfs used in the mound construction. Therefore, the article concludes, charcoal cannot be used to securely date archaeological features built with turfs and it is important to be aware of the possible presence of very old charcoal when selecting material for dating archaeological features, even those which otherwise would be judged unaffected by material from earlier archaeological periods.
{"title":"Dating Ancient Burial Mounds in Denmark – Revealing Problematic Ancient Charcoal","authors":"P. Henriksen, Sandie Holst, H. Breuning‐madsen","doi":"10.1080/00293652.2019.1670250","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00293652.2019.1670250","url":null,"abstract":"The National Museum of Denmark and the Department of Geography at the University of Copenhagen have collaborated on a project investigating burial mounds near early Medieval churches. The aim was to identify a possible continuity in cult sites across the shift to Christianity in the late Viking Age. Charcoal samples from 18 mounds were radiocarbon dated but the results showed they were far older than expected. Control dating undertaken on burial mounds of known age confirmed that charcoal in the mound fill can at least be up to 3000 years older than the mound itself. As charcoal can survive in the surface soil layer for millennia, in spite of ploughing, bioturbation and frost, it may also dominate the charcoal pool of the grass or heather turfs used in the mound construction. Therefore, the article concludes, charcoal cannot be used to securely date archaeological features built with turfs and it is important to be aware of the possible presence of very old charcoal when selecting material for dating archaeological features, even those which otherwise would be judged unaffected by material from earlier archaeological periods.","PeriodicalId":45030,"journal":{"name":"Norwegian Archaeological Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2019-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/00293652.2019.1670250","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43353304","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-07-03DOI: 10.1080/00293652.2019.1692366
Sarah E. Newman
Sarah Jackson, Joshua Wright, and Linda Brown’s efforts to ‘countermap the past’ by incorporating ancient Maya perspectives into modern modes of recording and visualizing archaeological excavations are challenging and thought-provoking. Their explorations raise a difficult but fundamental question for any practising archaeologist: How can we use available archaeological methods – from artefact typologies to spatial analyses – and current archaeological evidence – a shifting category in its own right (Wylie 2008) – to generate more expansive and inclusive archaeological interpretations than those currently available? That is, can archaeology be done reflexively, aware of its own biases and blindspots, and recursively, using its own practices to strengthen itself (against, for example, Haber 2012, Gnecco and Hernández 2008, for whom the discipline’s basic subject matter andmethod are inherently colonial)? The general use of Maya property qualifiers in the recording system of Say Kah’s excavation database and the spatial comparisons of their distribution using GIS prompt a reconsideration of themost basic elements of archaeological research. This is both stimulating and necessary. As the authors note, they hope that their work is ‘useful to archaeologists working in other times and places’ and that their ideas ‘are translatable to settings that may not have the same types of ancient textual and iconographic evidence’. Here I draw attention to epistemological and philosophical questions raised by this paper, namely the difficulties of translation (particularly via script rather than speaker) and the challenges of approaching systems of classification that are historically and culturally contingent.
{"title":"‘Stoan Branches Unner a Stoan Sky’","authors":"Sarah E. Newman","doi":"10.1080/00293652.2019.1692366","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00293652.2019.1692366","url":null,"abstract":"Sarah Jackson, Joshua Wright, and Linda Brown’s efforts to ‘countermap the past’ by incorporating ancient Maya perspectives into modern modes of recording and visualizing archaeological excavations are challenging and thought-provoking. Their explorations raise a difficult but fundamental question for any practising archaeologist: How can we use available archaeological methods – from artefact typologies to spatial analyses – and current archaeological evidence – a shifting category in its own right (Wylie 2008) – to generate more expansive and inclusive archaeological interpretations than those currently available? That is, can archaeology be done reflexively, aware of its own biases and blindspots, and recursively, using its own practices to strengthen itself (against, for example, Haber 2012, Gnecco and Hernández 2008, for whom the discipline’s basic subject matter andmethod are inherently colonial)? The general use of Maya property qualifiers in the recording system of Say Kah’s excavation database and the spatial comparisons of their distribution using GIS prompt a reconsideration of themost basic elements of archaeological research. This is both stimulating and necessary. As the authors note, they hope that their work is ‘useful to archaeologists working in other times and places’ and that their ideas ‘are translatable to settings that may not have the same types of ancient textual and iconographic evidence’. Here I draw attention to epistemological and philosophical questions raised by this paper, namely the difficulties of translation (particularly via script rather than speaker) and the challenges of approaching systems of classification that are historically and culturally contingent.","PeriodicalId":45030,"journal":{"name":"Norwegian Archaeological Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2019-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/00293652.2019.1692366","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46787979","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：