Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-xbtfd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-09T01:18:33.442Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Sherlock Holmes and Martin Heidegger

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 January 2009

James F. Weiner
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Let me begin my commentary on Julian Thomas' provocative and stimulating project by invoking, as anthropologists seem to do from time to time, the figure of Sherlock Holmes. Holmes, as we know, classified types of persons, livelihoods, mentalities and criminalities by, among other things, the varieties of dirt on their shoes, the characteristic calluses and grooves on their hands, the imprints they made upon different utensils, the kinds of tobacco, food scraps, and bits of clothing they left behind as traces of their presence. Holmes made a living out of deducing the motivational and moral contours of a human personality from such material indices. He knew the physical components of his environment – the different soils and plants of London, which stores purveyed which implements and goods characteristically utilised by criminals – and he catalogued the sartorial and other visible indices which marked inhabitants of different districts, and socioeconomic and ethnic categories. We also learned that he was not unfamiliar with the Who's Who of London society of his time, not to mention the London constabulary and the organisation of various other professions whose activities related to his interest in crime solving.

Type
Discussion
Information
Archaeological Dialogues , Volume 3 , Issue 1 , May 1996 , pp. 35 - 39
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s) 1996

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ascher, R., 1961: Analogy in archaeological interpretation, Southwestern journal of anthropology 17, 317–325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Assmann, A., 1991: Zur Metaphorik der Erinnerung, in Assmann, A. and Harth, D. (eds), Mnemosyne. Formen und Funktionen der kulturellen Erinnerung, Frankfurt am Main.Google Scholar
Augé, M., 1995: Non-Places. Introduction to an anthropology of super-modernity, London.Google Scholar
Bachelard, G., 1964: The poetics of space, Boston.Google Scholar
Bailey, G., 1981: Concepts, time-scales and explanations in economic prehistory, in Sheridan, A. and Bailey, G. (eds), Economic archaeology, Oxford, 97–118.Google Scholar
Bailey, G., 1983: Concepts of time in Quaternary prehistory, Annual review of anthropology 12, 165–192.Google Scholar
Barrett, J.C., 1988: Fields of discourse. Reconstituting a social archaeology, Critique of anthropology 7, 5–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barrett, J.C., 1994: Fragments from antiquity, Oxford.Google Scholar
Barthes, R., 1981: Theory of the text, in Young, R. (ed.), Untying the text, London, 31–47.Google Scholar
Battaglia, D., 1990: On the bones of the serpent. Person, memory and mortality in Sabarl Island society, Chicago.Google Scholar
Bhabha, H.K., 1994: The location of culture, London.Google Scholar
Buchli, V., 1995: Interpreting material culture. The trouble with text, in Hodder, I., Shanks, M., Alessandri, A., Buchli, V., Carman, J., Last, J. and Lucas, G. (eds), Interpreting archaeology: finding meanings in the past, London, 181–193.Google Scholar
Butler, J., 1993: Bodies that matter, London.Google Scholar
Dreyfus, H. and Rabinow, P., 1986: Michel Foucault. Beyond structuralism and hermeneutics, Brighton.Google Scholar
Gatens, M., 1992: Power, bodies and difference, in Barrett, M. and Phillips, A. (eds), Destabilizing theory. Contemporary feminist debates, Cambridge, 120–137.Google Scholar
Giddens, A., 1981: A contemporary critique of historical materialism, London.Google Scholar
Gosden, C., 1994: Social being and time, Oxford.Google Scholar
Haar, M., 1991: The song of the earth. Heidegger and the grounds of the history of being, Bloomington.Google Scholar
Heidegger, M., 1962: Being and time, Oxford (original German edition Sein und Zeit, 1927; translation by J. Macquarrie and E. Robinson).Google Scholar
Heidegger, M., 1971: Poetry, language, thought, New York.Google Scholar
Hodder, I., 1982: The present past, London.Google Scholar
Hodder, I., 1988: Material culture texts and social change. A theoretical discussion and some archaeological examples, Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 54, 67–76.Google Scholar
Hodder, I., 1989: This is not an article about material culture as text, Journal of anthropological archaeology 8, 250–269.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hodder, I., 1990: The domestication of Europe, Oxford.Google Scholar
Ingold, T., 1980: Hunters, pastoralists and ranchers, Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ingold, T., 1983: The architect and the bee. Reflections of the work of animals and men, Man 18, 1–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ingold, T., 1984: Time, social relations and the exploitation of animals. Anthropological reflections on prehistory, in Clutton-Brock, J. and Grigson, C. (eds), Animals in archaeology 3. Early herders and their flocks, Oxford, 3–12.Google Scholar
Ingold, T., 1986: Evolution and social life, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Jackson, M., 1989: Paths towards a clearing, Bloomington.Google Scholar
Macdonald, R., 1987: The burial-places of memory. Epic underworlds in Virgil, Dante, and Milton, Amherst.Google Scholar
Martin, R., 1988: Truth, power, self. An interview with Michel Foucault, in Martin, L.H., Gutman, H. and Hutton, P.H. (eds), Technologies of the self. A seminar with Michel Foucault, London, 9–15.Google Scholar
Mimica, J., 1993: The Foi and Heidegger. Western philosophical poetics and a New Guinea lifeworld, The Australian journal of anthropology 4, 79–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Patrik, L., 1985: Is there an archaeological record?, in Schiffer, M.B. (ed.), Advances in archaeological method and theory 3, London, 27–62.Google Scholar
Piggott, S., 1954: The Neolithic cultures of the British Isles, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Richards, C.C. and Thomas, J.S., 1984: Ritual activity and structured deposition in later Neolithic Wessex, in Bradley, R. and Gardiner, J. (eds), Neolithic studies, Oxford, 189–218.Google Scholar
Ricoeur, P., 1988: Time and narrative 3, Chicago.Google Scholar
Rose, G., 1993: Feminism and geography. The limits of geographical knowledge, Oxford.Google Scholar
Sartre, J.-P., 1943: L'être et le néant, Paris.Google Scholar
Shanks, M. and Tilley, C., 1987: Social theory and archaeology, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Thomas, J.S., 1991: Rethinking the Neolithic, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Weiner, J., 1991: The empty place. Poetry, space and being among the Foi of Papua New Guinea, Bloomington.Google Scholar
Weiner, J., 1993: To be at home with Others in an empty place. A reply to Mimica, The Australian journal of anthropology 4, 233–244.Google Scholar
Wylie, A., 1985: The reaction against analogy, in Schiffer, M.B. (ed.), Advances in archaeological method and theory 8, London, 63–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Young, J., 1993: The texture of memory. Holocaust memorials and meaning, New Haven.Google Scholar