Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7fkt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T00:57:15.709Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Materiality, Technology, and Constructing Social Knowledge through Bodily Representation: A View from Prehistoric Guernsey, Channel Islands

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 January 2017

Sheila Kohring*
Affiliation:
Department of Archaeology and Anthropology, University of Cambridge, UK
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

The role of the human body in the creation of social knowledge—as an ontological and/or aesthetic category—has been applied across social theory. In all these approaches, the body is viewed as a locus for experience and knowledge. If the body is a source of subjective knowledge, then it can also become an important means of creating ontological categories of self and society. The materiality of human representations within art traditions, then, can be interpreted as providing a means for contextualizing and aestheticizing the body in order to produce a symbolic and structural knowledge category. This paper explores the effect of material choices and techniques of production when representing the human body on how societies order and categorize the world.

Le rôle du corps dans la création du savoir social — comme catégorie ontologique et/ou esthétique — a été largement appliqué en théorie sociale. Toutes ces approches considèrent le corps comme un lieu de prédilection pour l'expérience et le savoir; il devient un instrument important pour créer des catégories ontologiques du soi et de la société. La matérialité des représentations humaines au sein des traditions artistiques peut alors être interprétée comme constituant un moyen de contextualisation et d'esthétisation du corps afin de produire une catégorie de savoir symbolique et structurel. Dans cet article nous examinons l'effet des choix de matériaux et des techniques de production lors de la représentation du corps humain sur la manière dont les sociétés classent et catégorisent le monde. Translation by Isabelle Gerges

Zusammenfassung

Zusammenfassung

Die Rolle des menschlichen Körpers bei der Schaffung sozialen Wissens — als ontologische und/oder ästhetische Kategorie — fand in der Sozialtheorie stets Berücksichtigung. Bei all diesen Ansätzen wird der Körper als Ort der Erfahrungen und des Wissens angesehen; und er wird ein wichtiges Instrument der Erhebung ontologischer Kategorien des Selbst und der Gesellschaft. Die Materialität menschlicher Darstellungen in den Felskunst-Traditionen kann somit als Hilfsmittel für die Kontextualisierung und Ästhetisierung des Körpers angesehen werden, um eine symbolische und strukturelle Wissenskategorie zu schaffen. Dieser Beitrag untersucht den Effekt der Materialwahl und der Produktionstechniken bei der Abbildung des menschlichen Körpers in Hinblick darauf, wie Gesellschaften die Welt gliedern und kategorisieren. Translation by Heiner Schwarzberg

Type
Articles
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
© Sheila Kohring 2014 This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits noncommercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is unaltered and is properly cited. The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained for commercial re-use or in order to create a derivative work.
Copyright
Copyright © European Association of Archaeologists 2014 

References

Boyer, P. 1996. What Makes Anthropomorphism Natural: Intuitive Ontology and Cultural Representations. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, n.s. 2: 115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bueno Ramírez, P., de Balbín Behrmann, R., Laporte, L., Bouezin, P., Barroso Bermejo, R., Hernanz Gismero, A., Gavira-Vallejo, J. & Iriarte Cela, M. 2012. Paintings in Atlantic Megalithic Art: Barnenez. Trabajos de Prehistoria, 69 (1): 123–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bukach, D. 2003. Exploring Identity and Place: An Analysis of the Provenance of Passage Grave Stones on Guernsey and Jersey in the Middle Neolithic. Oxford Journal of Archaeology, 22 (1): 2333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Casini, S., de Marinis, R.C. & Pedrotti, A. 1995. Statue-Stele e massi Incisi nell'Europa dell'Età del Rame. Notizie Archaeologiche Bergomensi 3. Bergamo: Civico Museo Archaelogico.Google Scholar
Casini, S. & Fossati, A. 2004. La Pietre degli Dei: Statue-Stele dell'Età del Rame in Europa — lo Stato della Ricerca. Notizie Archaeologiche Bergomensi 12. Bergamo: Civico Museo Archeologico.Google Scholar
Csordas, T.J. 1993. Somatic Modes of Attention. Cultural Anthropology, 8 (2): 135–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Csordas, T.J. 1994. Introduction: The Body as Representation and Being-in-the-World. In: Csordas, T.J., ed. Embodiment and Experience: The Existential Ground of Culture and Self. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 124.Google Scholar
d'Anna, A. 1977. Les statues-menhirs et steles anthropomorphes du midi méditerranéen. Paris: Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique.Google Scholar
De Guérin, T.W.M. 1920. Notes on the Recent Discovery of a Human Figure Sculptured on a Capstone of the Dolmen of Déhus, Guernsey. Man, 20: 129–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Domingo Sanz, I. 2006. La figura humana, paradigma de continuidad y cambio en el arte rupestre Levantino. Archivo de Prehistoria Levantina, 26: 161–91.Google Scholar
Gallay, A. 1995. Les stele anthropomorphes du site mégalithique du Petit-Chasseur à Sion (Valais, Suisse). In: Casini, S., de Marinis, R.C. & Pedrotti, A., eds. Statue-stele e Massi Incisi nell'Europa dell'Età del Rame. Notizie Archeologiche Bergomensi 3. Bergamo: Civico Museo Archeologico, pp. 167–94.Google Scholar
Garrow, D. & Sturt, F. in press. The Mesolithic-Neolithic Transition in the Channel Islands: Maritime and Terrestrial Perspectives. In: Darvill, T. & Sheridan, A., eds. Hands Across the Water: The Archaeology of the Cross-Channel Neolithic. London: British Academy. Google Scholar
Gell, A. 1998. Art and Agency: Towards a New Anthropological Theory. Oxford: Clarendon Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gilchrist, R. 2000. Unsexing the Body: The Interior Sexuality of Medieval Religious Women. In: Schmidt, R. & Voss, B., eds. Archaeologies of Sexuality. London: Routledge, pp. 89103.Google Scholar
Goffman, E. 1963. Behavior in Public Places: Notes on the Social Organization of Gatherings. New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar
Grosz, E. 1995. Space, Time, and Perversion: Essays on the Politics of Bodies. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Ingold, T. 2000. Making Culture and Weaving the World. In: Graves-Brown, P.M., ed. Matter, Materiality and Modern Culture. London: Routledge, pp. 5071.Google Scholar
Ingold, T. 2007. Materials Against Materiality. Archaeological Dialogues, 14 (1): 116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, A. 1999. Local Colour: Megalithic Architecture and Colour Symbolism in Neolithic Arran. Oxford Journal of Archaeology, 18 (4): 339–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kinnes, I. 1981. The Art of the Exceptional: The Statue-Menhir of Guernsey in Context. Archaeologia Atlantica, 3: 933.Google Scholar
Kinnes, I. 1995. Statue-Menhirs and Allied Representations in Northern France and the Channel Islands. In: Casini, S., de Marinis, R.C. & Pedrotti, A., eds. Statue-Stele e massi Incisi nell'Europa dell'Età del Rame. Notizie Archeologiche Bergomensi 3. Bergamo: Civico Museo Archeologico, pp. 131–41.Google Scholar
Kohring, S. 2013. Stepping Stones: Art and Community on Prehistoric Guernsey, Channel Islands. Journal of World Art, 3 (2): 297318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laqueur, T. 1990. Making Sex: Body and Gender from the Greeks to Freud. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Latour, B. 1991. Technology is Society Made Durable. In: Law, J., ed. A Sociology of Monsters: Essays on Power, Technology and Domination. London: Routledge, pp. 103–31.Google Scholar
Latour, B. 2002. Morality and Technology: The Ends of the Means. Trans. Venn, C. Theory, Culture & Society, 19 (5/6): 247–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Latour, B. 2005. Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to Actor-Network-Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Le Roux, C.-T. 1998. Du menhir à la statue dans le mégalithisme armoricain. In: Guilaine, J., ed. Actes du 2ème Colloque International sur la Statuaire Mégalithique, Saint-Pons-de-Thommières du 10 au 14 septembre 1997. Archéologie en Languedoc 22, pp. 217–35Google Scholar
L'Helgouac‘h, J. 1997. De la lumière au ténèbres. In: L'Helgouac‘h, J., Le Roux, C.-T. & Lecornec, J., eds. Art et Symboles du Mégalithisme Européen. Actes du 2ème Colloque International sur l'Art Mégalithique, Nantes 1995. Revue Archéologique de l'Ouest, supplément 8. Rennes: Association pour la Diffusion des Recherches Archéologiques dans l'Ouest de la France, pp. 107–23.Google Scholar
Mauss, M. 1979. The Notion of Body Techniques. In: Sociology and Psychology: Essays by Marcel Mauss. Trans. Brewster, B. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, pp. 95123.Google Scholar
Nanoglou, S. 2009a. Representing People, Constituting Worlds: Multiple ‘Neolithics’ in the Southern Balkans. Documenta Praehistorica, 36: 283–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nanoglou, S. 2009b. The Materiality of Representation: A Preface. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory, 16: 157–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pedrotti, A. 1995. Le Statue Stele de Arco: La Statuaria Antropomorfa Alpina nel III Mellennio AC: Abbigliamento, Fibre Tessili e Colore. Trento: Museo Civico di Riva del Garda.Google Scholar
Robb, J. 2009. People of Stone: Stelae, Personhood, and Society in Prehistoric Europe. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory, 16: 162–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roberts, C. & Cox, M. 2007. The Impact of Economic Intensification and Social Complexity on Human Health in Britain from 6000 BP (Neolithic) and the Introduction of Farming in the Mid-Nineteenth Century. In: Cohen, M. & Crane-Kramer, G.M., eds. Ancient Health: Skeletal Indicators and Economic Intensification. Gainesville: University Press of Florida, pp. 149–63.Google Scholar
Scarre, C. 2009. Stones with Character: Animism, Agency and Megalithic Monuments. In: O'Connor, B., Cooney, G. & Chapman, J., eds. Materialitas: Working Stone, Carving Identity. Oxford: Oxbow Books, pp. 918.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scarre, C. 2010. Megaliths, Memory and the Power of Stones. In: Calado, D., Baldia, M. & Boulanger, M., eds. Monumental Questions: Prehistoric Megaliths, Mounds and Enclosures. Oxford: Archaeopress, pp. 9196.Google Scholar
Schilling, C. 1993. The Body and Social Theory. London: SAGE.Google Scholar
Schilling, C. 2005. The Body in Culture, Technology and Society. London: SAGE.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schulting, R.J., Sebire, H. & Robb, J.E. 2010. On the Road to Paradis: New Insights from AMS Dating and Stable Isotopes at Le Déhus, Guernsey and the Channel Islands Middle Neolithic. Oxford Journal of Archaeology, 29 (2): 149–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sebire, H. 2005. The Archaeology and Early History of the Channel Islands. Stroud: Tempus.Google Scholar
Smith, P. 2004. The Body of the Artisan: Art and Experience in the Scientific Revolution. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tilley, C. 2004. The Materiality of Stone: Explorations in Landscape Phenomenology. Oxford: Berg Publishers.Google Scholar
Turner, B.S. 1984. The Body and Society: Exploration in Social Theory. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar