Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-wq2xx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-23T07:22:15.468Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Escaping from the pen?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 November 2013

Mark Pluciennik
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

First of all, congratulations to Nick Overton and Yannis Hamilakis for an excellent and stimulating paper, made all the better for including two considered and rich case studies. Though in no way an animal-bone specialist, I find myself in general agreement with their approach, which attempts to persuade zooarchaeologists of the value of engaging further with particular trends within theory in archaeology (and other disciplines) from the last decade or so. It is with the implications of relational archaeologies that I particularly wish to engage: I concur with the authors that zooarchaeology (and other subfields), as well as archaeology more generally, could benefit from challenges to anthropocentrism, whether expressed in ontological or other forms, and ultimately produce more holistic as well as more diverse pasts. My comments are thus more an exploration of some of the issues raised in this paper than a commentary upon the contents per se.

Type
Discussion
Information
Archaeological Dialogues , Volume 20 , Issue 2 , December 2013 , pp. 155 - 159
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2013 

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

Alberti, B., Fowles, S., Holbraad, M., Marshall, Y. and Witmore, C., 2011: ‘Worlds otherwise’. Archaeology, anthropology, and ontological difference, Current anthropology 52 (6), 896–912.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Argent, G., 2010: Do the clothes make the horse? Relationality, roles and statuses in Iron Age Inner Asia, World archaeology 42 (2), 157–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Argent, G., 2012: Toward a privileging of the nonverbal. Communication, corporeal synchrony, and transcendence in humans and horses, in Smith, J. and Mitchell, R. (eds) Experiencing animal minds. An anthology of animal–human encounters, New York, 111–28.Google Scholar
Bookchin, M., 2005: The ecology of freedom. The emergence and dissolution of hierarchy, rev. edn, Oakland, CA.Google Scholar
Castree, N., 2003: Environmental issues. Relational ontologies and hybrid politics, Progress in human geography 27, 203–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goodman, D., 2001: Ontology matters. The relational materiality of nature and agro-food studies, Sociologia ruralis 41 (2), 182–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hamilakis, Y., 2004: Archaeology and the politics of pedagogy, World archaeology 36 (2), 287–309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harris, O., and Robb, J., 2012: Multiple ontologies and the problem of the body in history, American anthropologist 114 (4), 668–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Henare, A., Holbraad, M. and Wastell, S. (eds), 2007: Thinking through things. Theorising artefacts ethnographically, London.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hodder, I., 2011: Human–thing entanglement. Towards an integrated archaeological perspective, Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute 17 (1), 154–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hodder, I., 2012: Entangled. An archaeology of the relationships between humans and things, New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holbraad, M., 2011: individual contribution in B. Alberti, S. Fowles, M. Holbraad, Y. Marshall and C. Witmore, ‘Worlds otherwise’. Archaeology, anthropology, and ontological difference, Current anthropology 52 (6), 907–8.Google Scholar
Ingold, T., 2012: Toward an ecology of materials, Annual review of anthropology 41, 427–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Latour, B., 1993: We have never been modern (tr. Porter, C.), Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
Latour, B., 2005: Reassembling the social. An introduction to actor-network theory, Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lorimer, H., 2005: Cultural geography. The busyness of being ‘more-than-representational’, Progress in human geography 29 (1), 83–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lorimer, H., 2006: Herding memories of humans and animals. Environment and planning D 24 (4), 497–518.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Olsen, B., 2003: Material culture after text. Re-membering things, Norwegian archaeological review 36 (2), 87–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Olsen, B., 2010: In defense of things. Archaeology and the ontology of objects, Lanham, MD.Google Scholar
Rindos, D., 1984: The origins of agriculture. An evolutionary perspective, Orlando.Google Scholar
Rival, L. (ed.), 1998: The social life of trees. Anthropological perspectives on tree symbolism, Oxford.Google Scholar
Shore, C., and Wright, S., 2000: Coercive accountability. The rise of audit culture in higher education, in Strathern, M. (ed.), Audit cultures. Anthropological studies in accountability, ethics and the academy, London, 57–89.Google Scholar
Tarlow, S., 2006: Archaeological ethics and the people of the past, in Scarre, C. and Scarre, G. (eds), The ethics of archaeology. Philosophical perspectives on archaeological practice, Cambridge, 199–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tarlow, S., 2011: Ritual, belief and the dead body in early modern Britain and Ireland, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Thrift, N., 2007: Non-representational theory. Space, politics, affect, London.Google Scholar
Walsh, K., 2008: Mediterranean landscape archaeology. Marginality and the culture–nature ‘divide’, Landscape research 33 (5), 547–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Webmoor, T., 2005: Mediational techniques and conceptual frameworks in archaeology. A model in mapwork at Teotihuacan, Mexico, Journal of social archaeology 5 (1), 52–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Webmoor, T., and Witmore, C. 2008: Things are us! A commentary on human/things relations under the banner of a ‘social’ archaeology, Norwegian archaeological review 41 (1), 53–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whatmore, S., 1997: Dissecting the autonomous self. Hybrid cartographies for a relational ethics, Environment and planning D 15, 37–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whatmore, S., 2002: Hybrid geographies. Natures, cultures, spaces, London.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Witmore, C., 2007: Symmetrical archaeology. Excerpts of a manifesto, World archaeology 39 (4), 546–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar