Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T19:25:11.996Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Nomadic Subjects: Sexual Difference in Ancient and Ethnographic Studies of Pastoral Mobility

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 March 2022

Claudia Chang Open the ORCID record for Claudia Chang [Opens in a new window]
Claudia Chang*
Affiliation:
Institute for the Study of the Ancient World New York University 508 Fellows Avenue Syracuse,NY13210-3125USA Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This essay explores Braidotti's nomadic subject as the starting point for a posthumanist perspective for the interpretation of ethnographic and ancient pastoral societies. Why has women's labour and positionality in such societies tended to be ignored by archaeology? The author's autobiographical discussion of her earlier work on village and transhumant pastoralists in Greece frames her personal discovery of gender and power dynamics in mobile societies. The main case study, however, examines the household archaeology of Iron Age Saka (eastern variants of Scythians) and later pastoral groups in order to put forth hypotheses about gendered production in semi-sedentary societies. Haraway's concept of the cyborg and Braidotti's concept of the nomadic subject are examined. Material studies of ceramic serving dishes, household debris and house form at an Iron Age agropastoral settlement apply some of the concepts of new feminisms. A comparison is drawn between the philosophy of nomadology and the anthropological archaeology of pastoral nomads.

Type
Special Section: Posthuman Feminism and Archaeology
Information
Cambridge Archaeological Journal , Volume 32 , Issue 2 , May 2022 , pp. 321 - 330
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research

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

Aljanova, N., Borbassova, K. & Rysbekova, S., 2015. A semiotic analysis of the yurt, clothing and food eating habits in Kazakh traditional cultures. International Journal of Critical Cultural Studies 14(1), 35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baipakov, K.M. & Taimaigambetov, Zh., 2006. Arkheologiya Kazakhstana [Archaeology of Kazakhstan]. Almati: Kazakh Universiti.Google Scholar
Barfield, T., 1989. The Perilous Frontier: Nomadic empires and China, 221 BC to AD 1757. Cambridge (MA): Blackwell.Google Scholar
Beckwith, C.I., 2009. Empires of the Silk Road: A history of central Eurasia from the Bronze Age to the present. Princeton (NJ): Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bohannan, L. [Bowen, E.S.], 1964. Return to Laughter. New York (NY): Doubleday.Google Scholar
Braidotti, R., 2011. Nomadic Subjects: Embodiment and sexual difference in contemporary feminist theory (2nd edn). New York (NY): Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Braidotti, R., 2013. The Posthuman. Cambridge/Malden: Polity.Google Scholar
Braidotti, R., 2016. Posthuman critical theory, in Critical Posthumanism and Planetary Futures, eds Banerji, D. & Paranjape, M.R.. New Delhi: Springer, 13–32.Google Scholar
Chang, C., 1993. Pastoral transhumance in the southern Balkans as a social ideology: ethnoarchaeological research in northern Greece. American Anthropologist 95(3), 687–703.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chang, C., 2017. Rethinking Prehistoric Central Asia: Shepherds, farmers, and nomads. Abingdon/New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chang, C., 2019. Round or square: Iron Age agro-pastoral households in the Talgar region of southeastern Kazakhstan, in Society for American Archaeology Symposium, Pastoral Households and Mobility, chaired by J-L. Houle, 14 April 2019.Google Scholar
Chang, C. & Tourtellotte, P.A., 1993. Ethnoarchaeological survey of pastoral transhumance sites in the Grevena region, Greece. Journal of Field Archaeology 20(3), 249–64.Google Scholar
Chang, C. & Zak, C.. 2019. Gendered universes: feasting now and then – serving vessels in contemporary Kazakh contexts and at the Iron Age site of Tuzusai. Symposium paper presented at the European Association for Archaeologists AGE session Gender and Technology in Everyday Life, chaired by C. Chang, K. Franklin & N.A. Palincas, 5 September 2019.Google Scholar
Conkey, M.W. & Spector, J.D., 1984. Archaeology and the study of gender, in Advances in Archaeological Method and Theory Vol. 7, ed. Schiffer, M.B.. Cambidge (MA): Academic Press, 1–38.Google Scholar
D'Andrea, A. 2006. Neo-nomadism: a theory of post-identitarian mobility in the global age. Mobilities 1(1), 95–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davis-Kimball, J., 1998. Statuses of eastern Iron Age nomads, in Papers from the EAA Third Annual Meeting in Ravenna 1997, Volume 1, Pre- and Protohistory, eds Pierce, M. & Tosi, M.. (BAR International Series S717.) Oxford: Archaeopress, 142–9.Google Scholar
Davis-Kimball, J., 2001. Warriors and priestesses of the Eurasian nomads, in The Archaeology of Cult and Religion, eds Biehl, P., Bertemes, F. & Meller, H.. Budapest: Archaeolingua, 243–59.Google Scholar
Davis-Kimball, J., 2003. Warrior Women: An archaeologist's search for history's hidden heroines. New York (NY): Warner Books.
Deleuze, G. & Guattari, F., 1987. A Thousand Plateaus: Capitalism and schizophrenia (trans. Massumi, B.). Minneapolis (MN): University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Di Cosmo, N., 1994. Ancient Inner Asian nomads: their economic basis and its significance in Chinese history. Journal of Asian Studies 53(4), 1092–126.Google Scholar
Doumani, D.P., Spengler, R.N. & Frachetti, M.D., 2018. Eurasian textiles: case studies in exchange during the incipient and later Silk Road periods. Quaternary International 468, 228–39.Google Scholar
Evans-Pritchard, E.E., 1940. The Nuer: A description of the modes of livelihood and political institutions of a Nilotic people. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Halstead, P., 1996. Pastoralism or household herding? Problems of scale and specialization in early Greek animal husbandry. World Archaeology 28(1), 20–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hanks, B., 2008. Reconsidering warfare, status, and gender in the Eurasian steppe Iron Age, in Are All Warriors Male?, eds Linduff, K.M. & Rubinson, K.S.. Lanham (MD): AltaMira, 25–34.Google Scholar
Haraway, D.J., 1991. Simians, Cyborgs, and Women: The reinvention of nature. London: Free Association Press.Google Scholar
Hayden, B. & Villeneuve, S., 2011. A century of feasting studies. Annual Review of Anthropology 40, 433–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Honeychurch, W. & Makarewicz, C.A.. 2016. The archaeology of pastoral nomadism. Annual Review of Anthropology 45, 341–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Khazanov, A.M., 1994. Nomads and the Outside World (2nd edn). Madison (WI): University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
Kuper, A., 1982. Wives for Cattle: Bridewealth and marriage in southern Africa. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Murphy, E.M., Schulting, R., Beer, N., Chistov, Y., Kasparov, A. & Pshenitsyna, M., 2013. Iron Age pastoral nomadism and agriculture in the eastern Eurasian steppe: implications from dental palaeopathology and stable carbon and nitrogen isotopes. Journal of Archaeological Science 40(5), 2547–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nixon, L. & Price, S., 2001. The diachronic analysis of pastoralism through comparative variables. Annual of the British School at Athens 96, 395–424.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taylor, T., 2010. Modeling the ‘Amazon’ phenomenon: colonization and gender performances, in Eventful Archaeologies: New approaches to social transformations in the archaeological record, ed. Bolender, D.J.. Albany (NY): State University of New York Press, 132–50.Google Scholar
Werner, C., 2009. Bride abduction in post-Soviet Central Asia: marking a shift towards patriarchy through local discourses of shame and tradition. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute 15(2), 314–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wylie, A., 2007. Doing archaeology as a feminist: introduction. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory 14(3), 209–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar