Fita tanning entails the application of thin strips of electrical tape to create an individualized bikini that will give women “a marquinha perfeita” (perfect little tan lines)—lines that are sharp, straight, and delightfully symmetrical. In Brazil, a country hyperfocused on color and racial mixture, tanning shows how low-income non-white women layer racial ideologies onto their bodies and into their aesthetic practices. We argue that tanners in Rio de Janeiro shake up ideas that racial identity can be linked to skin color and locatable on the body's surface. They also play with a national reputation, most famously/notoriously theorized by Gilberto Freyre, that to be Brazilian is to embody race mixture and brownness. Tanners reject an extreme or racially “pure” whiteness, but they also lean into racial beliefs about hypersexualized non-white bodies. Finally, tanners engage with very old ideas about race and climate that suggest fundamental differences between the civilized industriousness associated with whiteness and the supposed sloth and lascivious nature of those who live in the tropics. Through the meticulous care, bodily alteration, and self-improvement prominently displayed on their skin, non-white Brazilian tanners stake their own claims to racial respectability and discipline.
{"title":"Solar Seduction: Aesthetic Labor and Racial Discipline in Brazil's Newest Tanning Craze","authors":"Jennifer Roth-Gordon, Erika Robb Larkins","doi":"10.1111/aman.70006","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/aman.70006","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 <p><i>Fita</i> tanning entails the application of thin strips of electrical tape to create an individualized bikini that will give women “<i>a marquinha perfeita</i>” (perfect little tan lines)—lines that are sharp, straight, and delightfully symmetrical. In Brazil, a country hyperfocused on color and racial mixture, tanning shows how low-income non-white women layer racial ideologies onto their bodies and into their aesthetic practices. We argue that tanners in Rio de Janeiro shake up ideas that racial identity can be linked to skin color and locatable on the body's surface. They also play with a national reputation, most famously/notoriously theorized by Gilberto Freyre, that to be Brazilian is to embody race mixture and brownness. Tanners reject an extreme or racially “pure” whiteness, but they also lean into racial beliefs about hypersexualized non-white bodies. Finally, tanners engage with very old ideas about race and climate that suggest fundamental differences between the civilized industriousness associated with whiteness and the supposed sloth and lascivious nature of those who live in the tropics. Through the meticulous care, bodily alteration, and self-improvement prominently displayed on their skin, non-white Brazilian tanners stake their own claims to racial respectability and discipline.</p>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":7697,"journal":{"name":"American Anthropologist","volume":"127 4","pages":"694-706"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2025-07-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145449824","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This project began as a 35 mm film photography collection to document the presence of waste in the Northwest border of Tunisia, as the materiality of waste, its existence “everywhere,” has become a medium through which people in the region understand their positions at the margins of the nation-state. Yet after months, I realized that a light leak had marked all of my photographs. Taking the accident as a chance encounter, I produced a collection of images that articulate the gap between their intended effects, of visualizing waste, and their final rendering, images marked by a light leak. In this essay, I trace the project's process from my initial intentions of photographing waste to the light leak accident, to the final rendering into a visual booklet. In doing so, I foreground the light leak as an accident that became a generative method to examine the spills, leaks, and overflows of wasteful landscapes in North Africa.
{"title":"Light Leak as Method: Theorizing a Photographic Accident","authors":"Myriam Amri","doi":"10.1111/aman.28101","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/aman.28101","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 <p>This project began as a 35 mm film photography collection to document the presence of waste in the Northwest border of Tunisia, as the materiality of waste, its existence “everywhere,” has become a medium through which people in the region understand their positions at the margins of the nation-state. Yet after months, I realized that a light leak had marked all of my photographs. Taking the accident as a chance encounter, I produced a collection of images that articulate the gap between their intended effects, of visualizing waste, and their final rendering, images marked by a light leak. In this essay, I trace the project's process from my initial intentions of photographing waste to the light leak accident, to the final rendering into a visual booklet. In doing so, I foreground the light leak as an accident that became a generative method to examine the spills, leaks, and overflows of wasteful landscapes in North Africa.</p>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":7697,"journal":{"name":"American Anthropologist","volume":"127 4","pages":"833-840"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2025-07-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145449906","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"A Tyranny Against Itself: Intimate Partner Violence in the Margins of Bogotá","authors":"Federico Pérez Fernández","doi":"10.1111/aman.70007","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/aman.70007","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":7697,"journal":{"name":"American Anthropologist","volume":"127 4","pages":"915-916"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2025-07-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145449932","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Understanding the past lies at the core of archaeological practice, as it does for all historical disciplines. The fact that such understanding is partial, mediated, and tied to the perspectives of scholars operating in the present does not fully mitigate against what we might call “genuine” understanding of past worlds. For all its limits and constraints, historical evidence provides us with glimpses of other worlds, times, and places both familiar and unfamiliar. There are many reasons why such research is valuable, including the fundamental insight of all of anthropology, that there were—and are—many ways of being in the world. Historical and anthropological insights show us that our world is not singular, making it clear that change is indeed possible. This “use” of anthropological evidence can be called inspirational, contextualizing our own time and space, showing us possibilities of what the world could be.
In times of crisis, archaeologists may feel compelled to justify their work. The crisis is partially internal, taking the form of increasing casualization of the scholarly labor force, decreased public funding for higher education, and ongoing tensions between anthropology's traditional subfields for slices of a shrinking pie. More critically, the crisis is also external, with climate change and associated environmental challenges posing an existential threat to life on earth, a profoundly unsettling futurity for a discipline dedicated to the past. What role does archaeology have in addressing the climate crisis? What are our possible contributions, our responsibilities?
Media tropes of archaeology as “discovery” elide the analytical labor that turns landscapes, plant and animal remains, artifacts, and other forms of information into understandings of the past. Becoming “relevant” to the present does not absolve us from this difficult work; indeed, many interventions we can most usefully make call for careful multiproxy analyses. If we are to comment on matters environmental, we need to attend to socio-natural histories, the complex and variable records of historical co-construction that reject the notion of entirely separate “natural” and “human” histories (Morrison 2025).
The ways the past has been used to address the present and future are multiple. Besides using the past as a catalogue of difference and, potentially, of inspiration, we can also see historical understandings in terms of genealogy—how did we get to this moment? When I teach my course on climate change, I include some archaeological and historical material to help students see the current crisis as tethered to specific decisions and trajectories of change, vital context for transformative climate action. While archaeology as genealogy has been widely discussed in terms of heritage and in nationalist imaginations, it has less often been viewed in terms of socio-natural legacies. Shifting baseline syndrome (Pauly 1995) emerg
就像所有历史学科一样，理解过去是考古学实践的核心。事实上，这样的理解是部分的，中介的，并且与学者们在当下的观点联系在一起，这并不能完全减轻我们对过去世界的“真正”理解。尽管历史证据有种种限制和制约，但它为我们提供了其他世界、时代和地方的一瞥，这些世界、时代和地方既有熟悉的，也有不熟悉的。这类研究之所以有价值，有很多原因，包括所有人类学的基本见解，即在这个世界上存在着许多种方式。历史和人类学的见解告诉我们，我们的世界不是单一的，这清楚地表明，变化确实是可能的。这种对人类学证据的“使用”可以说是鼓舞人心的，将我们自己的时间和空间置于背景中，向我们展示了世界可能是什么样子的可能性。在危机时刻，考古学家可能会觉得有必要为自己的工作辩护。危机部分是内部的，表现为学术劳动力的日益临时工化，高等教育的公共资金减少，以及人类学传统分支领域之间为瓜分不断缩小的蛋糕而持续紧张。更关键的是，危机也是外部的，气候变化和相关的环境挑战对地球上的生命构成了生存威胁，对于一个致力于研究过去的学科来说，这是一个令人深感不安的未来。考古学在应对气候危机中扮演什么角色？我们可能的贡献和责任是什么？媒体将考古学比喻为“发现”，忽略了将景观、动植物遗骸、人工制品和其他形式的信息转化为对过去的理解的分析工作。与现在“相关”并不能使我们免除这项艰巨的工作；事实上，我们最能有效地提出的许多干预措施都需要仔细的多代理分析。如果我们要评论环境问题，我们需要关注社会-自然历史，历史共同建设的复杂和可变记录，拒绝完全分离的“自然”和“人类”历史的概念（Morrison 2025）。过去被用来描述现在和未来的方式多种多样。除了将过去作为差异的目录，以及潜在的灵感，我们还可以从谱系的角度来看待历史的理解——我们是如何到达这一刻的？当我教授气候变化课程时，我将一些考古和历史材料纳入其中，以帮助学生将当前的危机与具体的决策和变化轨迹联系起来，这是变革气候行动的重要背景。虽然考古学作为宗谱学在遗产和民族主义者的想象中被广泛讨论，但它很少被视为社会自然遗产。转移基线综合症（Pauly 1995）出现在渔业科学中，是“渔业研究人员在认识到海洋系统从一代到下一代的变化幅度方面持续和集体失败的趋势”（Alleway et al. 2023,886）。这种暂时的狭隘观点使人们对气候危机严重性的认识变得模糊。同样，对“正常”生物多样性或动物范围的基线认知的变化可能会模糊对人为变化的认识。考古数据有可能破坏缓慢变化的基线；很难想象老虎和羚羊在我工作的南印度地区漫游，但动物和历史证据表明，它们的消失是相对较近的。考古学家们试图建立当代“相关性”的最常见策略之一是论证“过去的教训”的价值。这是一个公认的流派，尤其受非考古学家的欢迎。过去的环境教训通常以寓言的形式构成——对干旱、温度变化或其他挑战的一些历史经验的反应被制成一个道德故事，薄薄的伪装成一个“教训”。许多教训都是平淡无奇的——例如“不要砍掉所有的树”——过去和现在之间明显的差异可能导致这种模糊性。道德故事类型往往深受当前时代精神的影响。例如，关于“崩溃”的文献，随着对环境的焦虑而起起落落，尤其倾向于决定论。在极端情况下，试图从过去汲取教训的作家可能会将贫困、压迫、殖民主义和任何数量的负面人类行为的责任转移到非个人的、不可抗拒的力量上（Diamond 1997）。 在整个90年代和本世纪头十年里，考古学家和历史学家对环境破坏的描述经常被整理出来，他们对提高环境危机的警报感兴趣，这种策略非常有效，以至于人类作为一个积极因素的概念，例如，生物多样性的创造，已经变得似乎违反直觉。因此，与崩溃叙事相反的可能是“可持续性”叙事，强调被视为“成功”的历史，具有当代效仿的潜力。这些叙述虽然重要，但有时会转向所谓的生态浪漫主义（Prasad 2011），将特定“种类”的人想象成自然地接近自然，不是因为他们的行为和决定，而是因为他们的身份（Morrison 2013）。在一些地方，这种说法开始改变；正如克雷奇（1999）所指出的那样，“生态印第安人”的神话——一种浪漫的、理想化的观点，认为在与欧洲人接触之前，北美人与自然的关系——掩盖了更复杂的历史。根据考古学家、古生态学家和土著人民自己的报告，后者包括与森林和森林中非常成功的生活方式，这些方式维持了人类和生态系统的健康（例如，Roos et al. 2021）。这些历史是从几代人的知识、取向和实践中产生的，而不是从与他人不同的某种本质身份中产生的。无论是警世故事还是振奋人心的故事，都很难与当下产生共鸣。这并不是否认历史比较的价值，但由于技术、人口、当然还有我们正在研究的历史本身所产生的社会自然景观的变化，比较不可避免地存在局限性。在这种情况下，关于崩溃、衰退、恢复力或可持续性的类比或寓言论证都在某种程度上起到了“鼓舞人心”的作用，表明了对困难的总体定位，而不是具体的行动路线图。然而，这样的叙述很重要；人类不可避免地破坏自然的故事为虚无主义地接受气候变化打开了一扇门，而希望和可能性的反叙事可能会鼓励积极参与。然而，我们来之不易的关于过去的知识，除了用作灵感、家谱或寓言之外，本身也有一些东西可以提供。首先，许多考古特征也是当代特征，使对其历史的理解与今天相关。散布在印度南部干旱地区的数千座径流水库（水箱）几乎都建于10世纪至16世纪之间，并被作为考古特征进行了研究（Morrison 2009,2010）。一些已经被废弃，而另一些正在使用，为小农提供关键的支持（图1）。它们的条件各不相同，但所有的水库都有淤积的历史，许多水库都经历过渗漏、大坝决口或性能不佳的情况。在我们对水库赞助的分析中，很明显，虽然许多水库有长期和成功的使用历史，但其他水库似乎是匆忙建造的，或者是在不太理想的地点建造的，作为精英表演的对象，获得宗教功绩的战略的物质成果，特别是政治展示（Morrison 2010）。这在当前的水箱修复计划中变得重要，使传统的灌溉工程恢复活力。确定不适合修复的“政治”水库可以避免可能危及更可行的修复目标的费用和失望。对过去的准确理解，尽管我们的结果可能是片面的和中介的，但不仅作为现在的家谱很重要，而且因为关于过去的陈述一直在发挥作用，为学术和大众话语提供信息。从关于临界基线的想法，到民族主义历史，再到科学模型，过去的环境一次又一次地出现。就人类和人类祖先几千年来帮助塑造自然世界而言，考古学知识的理解至关重要。认为人类的存在总是对生物多样性构成威胁的保护实践不仅是不正确的，而且很可能是不成功的。就连对全球未来至关重要的气候模型，也纳入了所谓的人为土地覆盖变化（ALCC）模型的数据，并将这些数据作为过去人类改造植被的参数。然而，这些模型没有使用考古数据，可能会歪曲过去的植被。考古学家目前正在与建模师和古生态学家合作，以更好地整合我们的数据（Morrison et al. 2021），并通过这样做，为我们共同的未来做出贡献。考古学家不需要将他们的工作与现在联系起来，因为它是有意义的，但我们确实有洞察力和证据来提供现在的时刻。 虽然“来自过去的教训”类型往往包含（重新）包装考古证据作为道德故事，在最坏的情况下复制环境决定论，文化本质主义，或其他观点，从过去抽离政治，励志，宗谱，甚至寓言考古学的
{"title":"Beyond “Lessons From the Past”: Archaeology and Environmental Crisis","authors":"Kathleen D. Morrison","doi":"10.1111/aman.70005","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/aman.70005","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Understanding the past lies at the core of archaeological practice, as it does for all historical disciplines. The fact that such understanding is partial, mediated, and tied to the perspectives of scholars operating in the present does not fully mitigate against what we might call “genuine” understanding of past worlds. For all its limits and constraints, historical evidence provides us with glimpses of other worlds, times, and places both familiar and unfamiliar. There are many reasons why such research is valuable, including the fundamental insight of all of anthropology, that there were—and are—many ways of being in the world. Historical and anthropological insights show us that our world is not singular, making it clear that change is indeed possible. This “use” of anthropological evidence can be called inspirational, contextualizing our own time and space, showing us possibilities of what the world could be.</p><p>In times of crisis, archaeologists may feel compelled to justify their work. The crisis is partially internal, taking the form of increasing casualization of the scholarly labor force, decreased public funding for higher education, and ongoing tensions between anthropology's traditional subfields for slices of a shrinking pie. More critically, the crisis is also external, with climate change and associated environmental challenges posing an existential threat to life on earth, a profoundly unsettling futurity for a discipline dedicated to the past. What role does archaeology have in addressing the climate crisis? What are our possible contributions, our responsibilities?</p><p>Media tropes of archaeology as “discovery” elide the analytical labor that turns landscapes, plant and animal remains, artifacts, and other forms of information into understandings of the past. Becoming “relevant” to the present does not absolve us from this difficult work; indeed, many interventions we can most usefully make call for careful multiproxy analyses. If we are to comment on matters environmental, we need to attend to socio-natural histories, the complex and variable records of historical co-construction that reject the notion of entirely separate “natural” and “human” histories (Morrison <span>2025</span>).</p><p>The ways the past has been used to address the present and future are multiple. Besides using the past as a catalogue of difference and, potentially, of inspiration, we can also see historical understandings in terms of genealogy—how did we get to this moment? When I teach my course on climate change, I include some archaeological and historical material to help students see the current crisis as tethered to specific decisions and trajectories of change, vital context for transformative climate action. While archaeology as genealogy has been widely discussed in terms of heritage and in nationalist imaginations, it has less often been viewed in terms of socio-natural legacies. Shifting baseline syndrome (Pauly <span>1995</span>) emerg","PeriodicalId":7697,"journal":{"name":"American Anthropologist","volume":"127 4","pages":"887-889"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2025-07-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://anthrosource.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/aman.70005","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145449905","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"The Problem of Resilience and the Politics of Precarity","authors":"Andrew M. Bauer","doi":"10.1111/aman.70004","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/aman.70004","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":7697,"journal":{"name":"American Anthropologist","volume":"127 4","pages":"884-886"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2025-07-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145449904","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
<p>Contributions to this forum exemplify the diversity and creativity of archaeological approaches to contemporary environmental crises. Many archaeologists expose the historical contexts of contemporary environmental challenges (e.g., Douglass and Cooper <span>2020</span>; Lightfoot et al. <span>2021</span>; see also Hunter <span>2025</span>; Ko <span>2025</span>; Stewart <span>forthcoming</span>; this forum) and work with community stakeholders to address environmental injustices via engaged practice (e.g., Apodaca and Sigona <span>2023</span>; Douglass et al. <span>2019</span>; Rothenberg <span>2023</span>; Schwalbe <span>2023</span>; Wolverton et al. <span>2021</span>; see also Barnett <span>forthcoming</span>; Cabral <span>2025</span>; Gilheany <span>2025</span>; this forum). Others focus on times and places less closely connected to modern communities, working within the comparative anthropological tradition to draw analogies between past and present that may inspire innovative technologies and policies (e.g., Fagan and Duranni <span>2021</span>; Fisher <span>2020</span>; Guttmann-Bond <span>2019</span>; see also Bauer <span>2025</span>; Kearns <span>2025</span>; Gaggioli <span>2025</span>; Marston <span>2025</span>; this forum). My own research in Iceland fits best within this comparative tradition, so I have found myself drawing analogical parallels between past and present environmental contexts, in hopes of inspiring meaningful action (Catlin <span>2016</span>; Catlin <span>2023</span>; Catlin and Bolender <span>2018</span>).</p><p>There has been considerable ambivalence about a “lessons-from-the-past” approach to modern ecopolitics (e.g., Catlin <span>2016</span>; Fisher et al. <span>2009</span>; Lane <span>2015</span>; Redman <span>2005</span>; see also Kearns <span>2025</span>; Marston <span>2025</span>; Morell-Hart <span>2025</span>; Morrison <span>2025</span>; this forum). Nonetheless, archaeologists engaged in this work remain convinced that past human experience holds important lessons for an uncertain future, and a number of recent publications have presented pathways toward productive conversations between past and present ecopolitics (e.g., Bauer <span>2023</span>; Fisher <span>2020</span>; Grauer <span>2021</span>; Grauer <span>2023</span>; Hartman et al. <span>2017</span>; Rockman and Hritz <span>2020</span>; Rosenzweig and Marston <span>2018</span>).</p><p>Archaeologists are well practiced at applying the material culture of the past to construct historically contingent trajectories of environmental and social change. Environmental archaeology reveals the character, scale, and timing of past ecological transformations (e.g., Ko <span>2025</span>; this forum), and simultaneous or sequential changes in material culture and the built environment suggest connections between social organization and human ecodynamics. This groundwork illuminates historically specific social and political processes that were a cause or consequence
对这个论坛的贡献体现了当代环境危机的考古方法的多样性和创造性。许多考古学家揭示了当代环境挑战的历史背景（例如，Douglass和Cooper 2020； Lightfoot等人2021；参见Hunter 2025； Ko 2025； Stewart即将到来；本论坛），并与社区利益相关者合作，通过参与实践来解决环境不公正问题（例如，Apodaca和Sigona 2023； Douglass等人2019；Rothenberg 2023; Schwalbe 2023； Wolverton等人2021；另见Barnett即将到来；Cabral 2025; Gilheany 2025；本论坛）。其他人则关注与现代社会联系不那么紧密的时间和地点，在比较人类学传统范围内开展工作，在过去和现在之间进行类比，从而可能激发创新技术和政策（例如，Fagan和Duranni 2021； Fisher 2020; Guttmann-Bond 2019；另见Bauer 2025； Kearns 2025; Gaggioli 2025; Marston 2025；本论坛）。我自己在冰岛的研究最符合这种比较传统，所以我发现自己在过去和现在的环境背景之间进行类比类比，希望能激发有意义的行动（卡特林2016年；卡特林2023年；卡特林和博兰德2018年）。对现代生态政治的“历史教训”方法存在相当大的矛盾心理（例如，Catlin 2016; Fisher et al. 2009; Lane 2015; Redman 2005；另见Kearns 2025； Marston 2025; Morell-Hart 2025; Morrison 2025；本论坛）。尽管如此，从事这项工作的考古学家仍然相信，过去的人类经验为不确定的未来提供了重要的教训，最近的一些出版物已经提出了过去和现在生态政治之间富有成效的对话的途径（例如，Bauer 2023; Fisher 2020; Grauer 2021; Grauer 2023； Hartman等人2017；Rockman和hriz 2020； Rosenzweig和Marston 2018）。考古学家善于运用过去的物质文化来构建环境和社会变化的历史偶然轨迹。环境考古学揭示了过去生态转变的特征、规模和时间（例如，Ko 2025；本论坛），物质文化和建筑环境的同步或顺序变化表明社会组织与人类生态动力学之间存在联系。这一基础阐明了历史上特定的社会和政治进程，这些进程是环境转变的原因或后果。然后可以评估过去的上下文是否提供了一个值得模仿的积极例子或要避免的对象教训。将我们的结论应用于当前需要扩展和转换，以便在类似的现代背景下为有效缓解危机提供明确和可操作的战略。最后，如果要激发行动，就必须将见解有效地传达给适当的受众。理想情况下，环境政治的考古学方法应该清晰地表达出具体的“来自过去的教训”，这些教训(1)在不牺牲细微差别的情况下，在不同的背景下可扩展和转移；(2)指出一个明确的行动项目；(3)强调考古学的重要贡献，要么提供独特的见解，要么为其他学科的见解提供重要的支持。过去人类生态动力学的标量变换往往具有挑战性。具体的生态实践，如可持续生存战略，可能不容易转移到现代环境中，而诸如弹性城市规划的潜力等概括性概念可能不具有明确的可操作性。与其关注具体的技术或实践，不如确定使某些物质实践成为过去生态条件的驱动力或反应的政治和社会战略（在这里，我赞同Bauer 2025、Gaggioli 2025、Marston 2025和本论坛的观点）。这相当于为植根于社会关系而非物质实践的过去变革寻求解释。考古学独特的长期视角不仅提供了对过去事件的描述，还提供了它们的前因后果以及长期影响和后果（Beck et al. 2007; Fisher 2020）。这种对历史进程复杂特殊性的明确关注，使考古学家能够识别出可能与过去人类生态动力学的社会和政治例子相似的现代背景，即使在特定的生态实践可能存在实质性差异的情况下，也提出了有效的干预措施。 什么样的社会机制导致了实践和生活方式的转变，它们是如何随着时间的推移而持续的？什么样的社会和政治关系导致了人类生态动力学的短期或长期变化？生态可持续性是否有负面的社会后果（如不平等加剧）？回答这些问题可能有助于更好地评估现代社会关系和政策建议，从而制定既鼓励可持续实践又符合社会正义目标的环境政策。通过这种方式，正如亨特（2025；本论坛）所倡导的那样，对过去危机的生态政治镜头可能会在时空尺度之间开辟新的翻译方式。冰岛的环境史就是一个很好的例子。公元9世纪晚期，挪威农民在岛上定居，加速了严重的环境退化，导致在定居的最初几个世纪里，生存和土地管理实践发生了重大变化（McGovern et al. 2007）。在9世纪和10世纪，随着定居者清除林地以建立永久性、生产性的田地和牧场，在许多地区，高土壤侵蚀率是一个意想不到的后果（Catlin 2019; Catlin and Bolender 2018; Dugmore et al. 2009）。在沉降的直接影响下，侵蚀开始放缓，最终达到破坏性较小、相对稳定的状态（Catlin 2019）。与此同时，到10世纪中叶，整个生产景观被划分为农业属性（Steinberg et al. 2016）。我的研究表明，在整个10世纪，非常小规模的农场是聚落景观的重要组成部分，后来被关闭，并被折叠成大型农场的广泛属性（Catlin 2021; Catlin et al. 2024）。这些土地管理上的转变为有历史记载的佃农制度奠定了基础，早在10世纪的传奇文学中就证实了这一点。到了17世纪和18世纪，租赁地被一群极度贫困、流动性高的佃农占据（Bolender 2012; Gunnlaugsson 1988; Johnson and Bolender 2019）。在9至11世纪期间，通过错综复杂的社会、政治和生态过程出现的环境可以支持千年尺度上的最低限度自给农业，尽管其外观在现代意义上已经高度退化（Catlin和Bolender 2018； Dugmore等人2020）。这种情况一直持续到18世纪和19世纪，当时丹麦殖民限制的放松为前佃农提供了土地所有权和国际贸易的机会（Júlíusson 2020）。随着农民利用新的机会，高原放牧的羊数量翻了一番，侵蚀率相应上升（Catlin 2019; Thórhallsdóttir et al. 2013）。11世纪小农场的关闭伴随着家庭分布和管理、土地利用和生态实践的重大变化。从各种规模的分散农场到更少、更大的农场，定居点的收缩为更广泛的土地利用开辟了空间。在我的研究领域，在12世纪和之后，许多当时被遗弃的小型早期农场被农业围栏和牲畜建筑所取代（Catlin 2019；图1）。这些围栏始终包围着比周围景观更深的土壤，提供可靠的优质放牧和外场干草来源。新的外场围栏作为早期基础设施开发的现有系统的一部分，包括家庭场地和牧场，更广阔景观的边界墙，以及构成农场中心的家庭和农业建筑（Einarsson 2015）。随着租户农业制度的出现，标准化的农业基础设施和实践加剧了租户的不稳定性和流动性，使农户有时每年在农场之间迁移，而对整
{"title":"Sustainable Pasts and Futures in the Archaeological Imagination","authors":"Kathryn A. Catlin","doi":"10.1111/aman.28108","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/aman.28108","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Contributions to this forum exemplify the diversity and creativity of archaeological approaches to contemporary environmental crises. Many archaeologists expose the historical contexts of contemporary environmental challenges (e.g., Douglass and Cooper <span>2020</span>; Lightfoot et al. <span>2021</span>; see also Hunter <span>2025</span>; Ko <span>2025</span>; Stewart <span>forthcoming</span>; this forum) and work with community stakeholders to address environmental injustices via engaged practice (e.g., Apodaca and Sigona <span>2023</span>; Douglass et al. <span>2019</span>; Rothenberg <span>2023</span>; Schwalbe <span>2023</span>; Wolverton et al. <span>2021</span>; see also Barnett <span>forthcoming</span>; Cabral <span>2025</span>; Gilheany <span>2025</span>; this forum). Others focus on times and places less closely connected to modern communities, working within the comparative anthropological tradition to draw analogies between past and present that may inspire innovative technologies and policies (e.g., Fagan and Duranni <span>2021</span>; Fisher <span>2020</span>; Guttmann-Bond <span>2019</span>; see also Bauer <span>2025</span>; Kearns <span>2025</span>; Gaggioli <span>2025</span>; Marston <span>2025</span>; this forum). My own research in Iceland fits best within this comparative tradition, so I have found myself drawing analogical parallels between past and present environmental contexts, in hopes of inspiring meaningful action (Catlin <span>2016</span>; Catlin <span>2023</span>; Catlin and Bolender <span>2018</span>).</p><p>There has been considerable ambivalence about a “lessons-from-the-past” approach to modern ecopolitics (e.g., Catlin <span>2016</span>; Fisher et al. <span>2009</span>; Lane <span>2015</span>; Redman <span>2005</span>; see also Kearns <span>2025</span>; Marston <span>2025</span>; Morell-Hart <span>2025</span>; Morrison <span>2025</span>; this forum). Nonetheless, archaeologists engaged in this work remain convinced that past human experience holds important lessons for an uncertain future, and a number of recent publications have presented pathways toward productive conversations between past and present ecopolitics (e.g., Bauer <span>2023</span>; Fisher <span>2020</span>; Grauer <span>2021</span>; Grauer <span>2023</span>; Hartman et al. <span>2017</span>; Rockman and Hritz <span>2020</span>; Rosenzweig and Marston <span>2018</span>).</p><p>Archaeologists are well practiced at applying the material culture of the past to construct historically contingent trajectories of environmental and social change. Environmental archaeology reveals the character, scale, and timing of past ecological transformations (e.g., Ko <span>2025</span>; this forum), and simultaneous or sequential changes in material culture and the built environment suggest connections between social organization and human ecodynamics. This groundwork illuminates historically specific social and political processes that were a cause or consequence","PeriodicalId":7697,"journal":{"name":"American Anthropologist","volume":"127 4","pages":"879-883"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2025-07-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://anthrosource.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/aman.28108","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145449891","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Archaeology as Hyperlocal Practice: A Case Study in the Material Afterlives of the Cold War","authors":"Emma Gilheany","doi":"10.1111/aman.70000","DOIUrl":"10.1111/aman.70000","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":7697,"journal":{"name":"American Anthropologist","volume":"127 3","pages":"660-662"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2025-07-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144894170","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Politics of Resilience and Materialism in Archaeological Explanation","authors":"John M. Marston","doi":"10.1111/aman.70002","DOIUrl":"10.1111/aman.70002","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":7697,"journal":{"name":"American Anthropologist","volume":"127 3","pages":"656-659"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2025-07-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144894185","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
<p>While writing these lines, heavy rains flooded my hometown, Porto Alegre, in southern Brazil, for over a month. This city became another icon of the global climatic crisis, submerged in an unprecedented tragedy that affected more than 90 percent of the municipalities in the State of Rio Grande do Sul. On the opposite side of the country, the Amazon is experiencing the worst drought ever recorded. As scientists, environmentalists, and politicians debate the reasons for these crises and strategies to mitigate their impacts, the concept of “natural resources” takes on a prominent role, describing unbalanced relationships between nature and people.</p><p>Drawing from the definition by the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP <span>2009</span>, 9), “natural resources are actual or potential sources of wealth that occur in a natural state, such as timber, water, fertile land, wildlife, minerals, metals, stones, and hydrocarbons.” Naturalized as it is, this concept reinforces the division between nature and culture and its exploitative basis. It implies a hierarchical relationship in which humanity occupies a superior position and thus commands nature. Nature is a “source of wealth.”</p><p>This division has guided archaeology, a discipline that relies on our expertise to distinguish between nature and culture, as we learn to separate—for example—flaked rocks from naturally broken pieces or an anthropogenic mound from a natural feature. Our ability to discern between anthropogenic and natural processes sustains our disciplinary specificity.</p><p>Here, I intend to challenge and blur this distinction to incite our archaeological imagination to envision different possibilities of being human, of social existences, and of explanations.</p><p>I engage with the work of three Indigenous and Afrodiasporic scholars from Brazil: Ailton Krenak (<span>2023</span>), Antônio Bispo dos Santos (<span>2023</span>), and Glicéria Tupinambá (<span>2023</span>). Their work emphasizes the active, sentient, and affective character of land/earth.1 I will use it along with lessons I received from the Wajãpi Indigenous People, with whom I have worked since 2009 (Cabral <span>2015, 2022</span>).</p><p>Drawing from discussions in Indigenous ethnology in South America (De La Cadena & Blaser 2018; Gomes et al. <span>2020</span>; Oliveira et al. <span>2020</span>), I use the concept of different worlds to emphasize the understanding that, beyond cultural difference, there are diverse definitions of what reality is. Anthropologists Marisol de la Cadena and Mario Blaser (<span>2018</span>) invite us to use the concept of “Pluriverse” to open space in our imagination for the existence of multiple worlds. Embracing this concept, we create room to challenge ourselves <i>to think with</i> different worlds.</p><p>Beyond recognizing differences, this choice is also a political stance, allowing other categories to exist. It reveals their boundaries and limitations as a path of dism
就在我写这些文字的时候，大雨淹没了我的家乡——巴西南部的阿雷格里港，持续了一个多月。这座城市成为全球气候危机的另一个标志，淹没在一场前所未有的悲剧中，这场悲剧影响了南巴西格兰德州90%以上的城市。在这个国家的另一边，亚马逊正在经历有史以来最严重的干旱。当科学家、环保主义者和政治家们争论这些危机的原因和减轻其影响的策略时，“自然资源”的概念扮演了一个突出的角色，描述了自然与人之间不平衡的关系。根据联合国环境规划署的定义（UNEP 2009, 9），“自然资源是在自然状态下发生的实际或潜在的财富来源，如木材、水、肥沃的土地、野生动物、矿物、金属、石头和碳氢化合物。”虽然自然化了，但这一概念强化了自然与文化之间的分裂及其剥削基础。它暗示了一种等级关系，在这种关系中，人类占据着优越的地位，从而控制着自然。自然是“财富之源”。这种划分指导了考古学，这是一门依靠我们的专业知识来区分自然和文化的学科，例如，我们学会了将剥落的岩石从自然破碎的碎片中分离出来，或将人为的土堆从自然特征中分离出来。我们区分人为过程和自然过程的能力维持了我们学科的特殊性。在这里，我打算挑战和模糊这种区别，以激发我们的考古想象力，想象人类、社会存在和解释的不同可能性。我参与了三位来自巴西的土著和非洲移民学者的工作：Ailton Krenak (2023), Antônio Bispo dos Santos（2023）和glicsamria tupinamb<e:1>(2023)。他们的作品强调土地的活跃、感性和情感特征我将使用它以及我从2009年起与我一起工作的waj<e:1>皮土著人民那里得到的经验教训（Cabral 2015, 2022）。根据南美土著民族学的讨论（De La Cadena & Blaser 2018; Gomes et al. 2020; Oliveira et al. 2020），我使用不同世界的概念来强调这样一种理解，即除了文化差异之外，现实是什么还有不同的定义。人类学家Marisol de la Cadena和Mario Blaser（2018）邀请我们使用“多元宇宙”的概念，在我们的想象中为多个世界的存在打开空间。拥抱这一概念，我们创造了挑战自我的空间，以不同的世界思考。除了承认差异之外，这种选择也是一种政治立场，允许其他类别存在。它揭示了它们的边界和局限性，作为拆除和语境化这些类别的路径。它强调，世界之间除了差异之外，也存在分歧。我认为，“自然资源”这一类别阻碍了我们设想亚马逊地区存在（过去、现在或未来）的能力，在那里，土著居民和其他森林居民不仅可以作为生存体，而且可以作为具有弹性知识的体而茁壮成长。他们是亚马逊长期历史的管家，这是人类与其他生物之间高度关联的关系历史（Van Velthem 2003; Esbell 2018; Oliveira et al. 2020），包括那些在西方环境中不被视为生物的生物，如土地/地球。前面提到的学者提醒我们注意这一点。一位著名的土著学者Ailton Krenak（2023,238）指出：“我们不必‘照顾’土地，我们必须尊重地球这个有生命的有机体。”Quilombola的领导人Bispo dos Santos（2023）解释说：“我们之间有一种共识，那就是土地是有生命的，如果它能生产，它也应该休息。”土著艺术家格里克·萨里亚·图皮纳姆·巴<e:1>（2023年）报告说：“地球在做梦。这条河睡着了。”他们断言土地/地球是一个有生命的有机体，有梦想，需要休息。这些陈述可以被视为诗意的隐喻，表达了主流概念难以捕捉的想法。然而，正如巴西考古学家Lara de Paula Passos（2019）所建议的那样，欣赏他们陈述的诗意之美可以为公认的科学权威提供信息。她挑战了诗歌不科学的传统观点，认为诗歌可以成为改变我们理解和交流科学知识的强大工具（Passos 2021）。从这个意义上说，克雷纳克、比斯波·多斯桑托斯和格里克·塔皮南巴<e:1>的诗歌表达不应该仅仅被视为文学练习而被忽视，而应该被视为重塑科学话语的重要贡献，扩大科学话语的边界，包括多样化的、经常被边缘化的认识方式。 如果我们认真对待他们关于土地和地球的主张——不是作为诗歌、隐喻或神话，而是作为另一个世界和不同存在体制的表达，会发生什么？自从我开始在巴西亚马逊地区的阿玛帕<e:1>与瓦伊<s:1>皮土著人民一起工作以来，我就一直从事这项工作。在waj<e:1>皮土著土地上开展的考古项目与waj<e:1>皮人一起发展，为将与Krenak、Bispo和tupinamb<e:1>相关的知识付诸实践提供了许多机会。这些知识不仅偏离了我们传统的考古学概念，而且揭示了不同的世界。通过waj<e:1> pi，我了解到石斧刀片和陶瓷碎片在地下打鼾，这是找到这些文物的完全可以接受的方式（Cabral 2017）。人们也可以通过梦境和与非人类的对话来学习通往古老地方的道路（Cabral 2015）。有一次，在waj<e:1>皮地的一条中型河流上航行时，我看到了河岸上一个小滑坡的痕迹（图1）。山体滑坡冲垮了树木，并将沉积物冲入河中。当我问知识管理员ajare<s:1> ty waj<e:1> pi为什么会发生滑坡时，她立即回答说，这是由于非土著巴西人在距离土著土地边界30多英里的地方砍伐森林造成的。森林感到愤怒，把泥土和树木扔进河里作为报复。ajare<e:1> ty还解释说，巴西人不知道如何与森林共存。他们（我们！）拿走他们能拿走的一切，猎杀所有的动物，只知道如何提取。正如比斯波警告的那样，他们不会让土地休息。然后她给我举了cipó-titica （Heteropsis flexuosa）的例子，这是一种在亚马逊广泛使用的藤蔓，用于制作工艺品。这种藤蔓生长在大树上。事实上，对于waj<e:1>派来说，树木用“cipó-titica”来装饰自己，这是树木的项链（图2）。项链是瓦吉<e:1>皮人的重要装饰品，用于装饰，是社会存在的基本特征。继Viveiros de Castro（1998）和Stolze Lima（1996）总结了美洲印第安人的透视主义之后，waj<e:1>皮人承认不同社会存在的共同人格。例如，在起源故事中，动物和人类曾经是无法区分的——他们都是人。根据这些叙述，不同的生物转变成我们今天所认识的身体，但这种转变并不局限于遥远的过去。有一次，一位名叫Kasiripinã waj<e:1> pi的老人向我解释说，所有的动物都穿着让它们看起来像它们的衣服。他指着一只小蜂鸟说：“你看，它们看起来很小，但那只是因为它们的衣服；如果他们脱了，他们看起来就和我们一样了。”对于waj<e:1>皮人来说，动物和其他生物，比如cipó-titica生长的大树，都是人，尽管我们认为他们有不同的身体。当ajare<e:1>向我解释河边的滑坡时，她借鉴了waj<e:1>皮的知识体系。居住
{"title":"Against Natural Resources: Engaging With Indigenous Knowledge to Imagine the Past and the Future of the Amazon","authors":"Mariana Petry Cabral","doi":"10.1111/aman.70001","DOIUrl":"10.1111/aman.70001","url":null,"abstract":"<p>While writing these lines, heavy rains flooded my hometown, Porto Alegre, in southern Brazil, for over a month. This city became another icon of the global climatic crisis, submerged in an unprecedented tragedy that affected more than 90 percent of the municipalities in the State of Rio Grande do Sul. On the opposite side of the country, the Amazon is experiencing the worst drought ever recorded. As scientists, environmentalists, and politicians debate the reasons for these crises and strategies to mitigate their impacts, the concept of “natural resources” takes on a prominent role, describing unbalanced relationships between nature and people.</p><p>Drawing from the definition by the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP <span>2009</span>, 9), “natural resources are actual or potential sources of wealth that occur in a natural state, such as timber, water, fertile land, wildlife, minerals, metals, stones, and hydrocarbons.” Naturalized as it is, this concept reinforces the division between nature and culture and its exploitative basis. It implies a hierarchical relationship in which humanity occupies a superior position and thus commands nature. Nature is a “source of wealth.”</p><p>This division has guided archaeology, a discipline that relies on our expertise to distinguish between nature and culture, as we learn to separate—for example—flaked rocks from naturally broken pieces or an anthropogenic mound from a natural feature. Our ability to discern between anthropogenic and natural processes sustains our disciplinary specificity.</p><p>Here, I intend to challenge and blur this distinction to incite our archaeological imagination to envision different possibilities of being human, of social existences, and of explanations.</p><p>I engage with the work of three Indigenous and Afrodiasporic scholars from Brazil: Ailton Krenak (<span>2023</span>), Antônio Bispo dos Santos (<span>2023</span>), and Glicéria Tupinambá (<span>2023</span>). Their work emphasizes the active, sentient, and affective character of land/earth.1 I will use it along with lessons I received from the Wajãpi Indigenous People, with whom I have worked since 2009 (Cabral <span>2015, 2022</span>).</p><p>Drawing from discussions in Indigenous ethnology in South America (De La Cadena & Blaser 2018; Gomes et al. <span>2020</span>; Oliveira et al. <span>2020</span>), I use the concept of different worlds to emphasize the understanding that, beyond cultural difference, there are diverse definitions of what reality is. Anthropologists Marisol de la Cadena and Mario Blaser (<span>2018</span>) invite us to use the concept of “Pluriverse” to open space in our imagination for the existence of multiple worlds. Embracing this concept, we create room to challenge ourselves <i>to think with</i> different worlds.</p><p>Beyond recognizing differences, this choice is also a political stance, allowing other categories to exist. It reveals their boundaries and limitations as a path of dism","PeriodicalId":7697,"journal":{"name":"American Anthropologist","volume":"127 3","pages":"652-655"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2025-07-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://anthrosource.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/aman.70001","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144894123","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号