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

Abstract

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.

Rock art technology, digital imaging and experimental archaeology: recent research on Iberian Late Bronze Age warrior stelae

“…In relation to petroglyph-making, the most relevant for the purpose of this paper, this kind of research has produced significant insights into the traces and markings left by different tools and the assessment of the production process (Alvarez et al, 2001;Bednarik 1998;Whittaker et al 2000). But fewer studies have examined the operational sequence (chaîne opératoire) and the social dimensions of rock art production (but see, for example, Fahlander, 2012;Fiore, 1996Fiore, , 2007Kohring, 2014;Vergara and Troncoso, 2015). Fahlander (2012), for example, explored the complex sets of relations in which rock art motifs are embedded, and their social and ritual significance through a focus on materiality and process.…”

Rune Stones as Material Relations in Late Pagan and Early Christian Scandinavia

“…In this expression, it is central to underline their physicality. Interpretations of prehistoric standing stones point towards the importance of the materiality of the stones (see for instance Kohring 2014;Robb 2009). This is even relevant for the rune stones and includes placing emphasis on the material qualities of the raised stones (see Back Danielsson 2015a, 158 with references).…”

Agency ‘in itself’. A discussion of inanimate, animal and human agency

“…Humans project and attribute agency and life onto things. As Kohring (2014, 248) puts it, ‘it is a cognitive extension of self and experience to transfer anthropomorphic characteristics and actions onto physical objects’. But just as you and I speak to our things, but would be startled if they spoke back, I presume that Sámi who revere sieidi (sacred boulders) by sacrificing food to them would be surprised if the stones literally gaped and consumed the food.…”