Social landscapes

Joanna Brück
{"title":"Social landscapes","authors":"Joanna Brück","doi":"10.2307/j.ctvh1dpxr.8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In 1960 a rock climber found a small Middle Bronze Age pot wedged in a cleft in the rock halfway down the eastern face of Crow’s Buttress, a granite outcrop on the southern edge of Dartmoor in Devon (Pettit 1974, 92). The Middle Bronze Age was a period during which extensive field systems were constructed on Dartmoor (Fleming 1988). As we shall see later in this chapter, these have often been thought to indicate the intensification of agriculture and an increasing concern to define land ownership in response to population pressure (e.g. Barrett 1980a; 1994, 148–9; Bradley 1984, 9; Yates 2007, 120–1; English 2013, 139–40). Such models imply the commodification of the natural world: the landscape is viewed primarily as a resource for economic exploitation. Yet this small pot calls such assumptions into question, for it can surely be best interpreted as an offering to spirit guardians or ancestors associated with a striking natural rock formation. This hints at a quite different way of engaging with and understanding the landscape. In this chapter we will explore the links between people and landscape, beginning with the monumental landscapes of the Chalcolithic and Early Bronze Age, moving then to consider what the appearance of field systems during the Middle and Late Bronze Age tells us about human–environment relationships during the later part of the period, and finally considering some of the ways in which animals were incorporated into the social worlds of Bronze Age communities. Funerary and ceremonial monuments of various sorts are the most eye-catching feature of the Early Bronze Age landscape and have dominated our interpretations of the period. By contrast, as we have seen in Chapter 4, settlement evidence of this date is relatively sparse. This, and recent isotope analyses of Chalcolithic and Early Bronze Age inhumation burials (Jay et al. 2012; Parker Pearson et al. 2016), suggest a significant degree of residential mobility.","PeriodicalId":390502,"journal":{"name":"Personifying Prehistory","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-02-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Personifying Prehistory","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvh1dpxr.8","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

In 1960 a rock climber found a small Middle Bronze Age pot wedged in a cleft in the rock halfway down the eastern face of Crow’s Buttress, a granite outcrop on the southern edge of Dartmoor in Devon (Pettit 1974, 92). The Middle Bronze Age was a period during which extensive field systems were constructed on Dartmoor (Fleming 1988). As we shall see later in this chapter, these have often been thought to indicate the intensification of agriculture and an increasing concern to define land ownership in response to population pressure (e.g. Barrett 1980a; 1994, 148–9; Bradley 1984, 9; Yates 2007, 120–1; English 2013, 139–40). Such models imply the commodification of the natural world: the landscape is viewed primarily as a resource for economic exploitation. Yet this small pot calls such assumptions into question, for it can surely be best interpreted as an offering to spirit guardians or ancestors associated with a striking natural rock formation. This hints at a quite different way of engaging with and understanding the landscape. In this chapter we will explore the links between people and landscape, beginning with the monumental landscapes of the Chalcolithic and Early Bronze Age, moving then to consider what the appearance of field systems during the Middle and Late Bronze Age tells us about human–environment relationships during the later part of the period, and finally considering some of the ways in which animals were incorporated into the social worlds of Bronze Age communities. Funerary and ceremonial monuments of various sorts are the most eye-catching feature of the Early Bronze Age landscape and have dominated our interpretations of the period. By contrast, as we have seen in Chapter 4, settlement evidence of this date is relatively sparse. This, and recent isotope analyses of Chalcolithic and Early Bronze Age inhumation burials (Jay et al. 2012; Parker Pearson et al. 2016), suggest a significant degree of residential mobility.
社会风景
1960年,一位攀岩者在德文郡达特穆尔南部边缘的一块花岗岩露头——乌鸦扶壁(Crow’s Buttress)东侧半山腰的岩石裂缝中发现了一个中青铜器时代的小壶(Pettit 1974, 92)。青铜器时代中期是在达特穆尔建立了广泛的田野系统的时期(Fleming 1988)。正如我们将在本章后面看到的,这些通常被认为表明农业的集约化和对界定土地所有权以应对人口压力的日益关注(例如Barrett 1980;1994年,148 - 9;布拉德利1984,9;耶茨2007,120-1;英语2013,139-40)。这种模式意味着自然世界的商品化:景观主要被视为经济开发的资源。然而,这个小罐子对这种假设提出了质疑,因为它肯定可以最好地解释为与惊人的天然岩石形成有关的精神守护者或祖先的供品。这暗示了一种完全不同的参与和理解景观的方式。在本章中,我们将探索人与景观之间的联系,从铜器时代和早期青铜时代的纪念性景观开始,然后考虑青铜器时代中期和晚期的田野系统的出现告诉我们在这一时期后期人类与环境的关系,最后考虑动物被纳入青铜时代社区社会世界的一些方式。各种各样的葬礼和仪式纪念碑是早期青铜时代景观中最引人注目的特征,并主导了我们对这一时期的解释。相比之下,正如我们在第四章中所看到的,这一时期的定居证据相对较少。这一点,以及最近对铜石器时代和早期青铜时代人葬的同位素分析(Jay et al. 2012;Parker Pearson等人,2016),表明了很大程度的居住流动性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信