The Social Archaeology of the Levant. From Prehistory to the Present

IF 0.5 2区 历史学 0 ARCHAEOLOGY
T. Kiely
{"title":"The Social Archaeology of the Levant. From Prehistory to the Present","authors":"T. Kiely","doi":"10.1080/00758914.2021.1981741","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In the forward to this varied and stimulating collection of essays on the archaeology of the southern Levant from the Palaeolithic to the present day, Thomas Levy (p. xvii) recalls how his 1998 edited volume The Archaeology of Society in the Holy Land was praised by Kent Flannery for helping the Old Testament meet the New Archaeology. Sketching an agenda for the 21st century, Levy emphasises five new or revamped themes: transdisciplinary research; the application of science to historical biblical archaeology; ‘cyber-archaeology’; high-precision dating; and climatic and environmental approaches. For Levy, social archaeology ‘aims at the ‘big picture’ of what happens in society, how it happened, how it changes, and how it is reflected in the archaeological (material culture) record’ (p. xvii). Yet, even by the time Levy 1998 was published, ‘social archaeology’ was being defined in much broader terms, reflecting a range of post-modern and post-colonial paradigms. Among other things, this ‘turn’ sought to interrogate basic methodologies (especially positivism and presentism) and to question accepted social categories (such as personhood, gender, ethnicity, race), as well as to investigate how archaeological discourse was distorted by contemporary and/or Western or colonial attitudes and epistemologies. This expanded understanding of social archaeology is introduced in the editors’ prologue to the present volume, though it is applied somewhat unevenly throughout the text, and in some cases not really addressed at all. This is not helped by the uneven presentation of material culture and archaeological contexts, or of maps and chronological charts to allow easy comparison across a highly compartmentalised structure. The book cannot, therefore, be regarded as a handbook, or indeed, as an entirely satisfactory guide for scholars working outside the discipline, whose questions on a range of topics will not be readily answered. Finally, the reality that the volume is really about the southern Levant is relegated to a footnote on p. 5 — the editors imply that the volume began with broader aims, retaining the, presumably, more marketable title. The first four sections, 26 essays in total, provide a chronological narrative beginning with the ‘dawn’ of human presence in the region, with some thematic interludes: Shahack-Gross, for example, discusses the social and technological implications of fire from the Palaeolithic to the Iron Age (Chapter 5), whilst Sheridan focuses on comingled human bone assemblages in the Bronze Age, Iron Age and Byzantine periods (Chapter 11). The overall chronological coverage of the volume is impressive, from the Lower Palaeolithic to the Frankish period. Levy 1998 made it down to the British Mandate, though the present volume covers some aspects of the latter through the lenses of excavation histories, colonialism and modern heritage (Chapters 32 and 33) which raise important contemporary issues. The chapters of Part One grapple in various ways with the very nature of human society, touching upon the complexity and limitations of the datasets from Palaeolithic contexts (Chapters 1 (Rollefson) and 2 (Belfer-Cohen and Goring-Morris)), as well as the diverse and disputed pathways towards sedentism and social complexity in the Epipalaeolithic and early Neolithic (Munro and Grosman, Chapter 3). Moving forwards in time, Finlayson (Chapter 4) discusses the complex relationships between increased sedentism (or at least ‘investment in place’), the nature and social implications of settlement architecture, and broader economic strategies during the Neolithic period; stressing the importance of community and collective agency whilst identifying incremental shifts towards individual households— if not actually individuals — by the PPNB. Chapter 5 (Banning) questions the once embedded notion of the late Neolithic as a kind of Dark Age that interrupted PPNB trajectories towards urbanism; he also provides one of the few explicit discussions of gender distinctions and associated labour roles, while subtly highlighting the importance of quotidian food practices, as opposed to rare events such as feasts, in social formation. The final two chapters of Part One focus on the Chalcolithic. Chapter 7 (Rowan) contrasts the relatively simple nature of settlement forms and","PeriodicalId":45348,"journal":{"name":"Levant","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2021-05-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Levant","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00758914.2021.1981741","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"ARCHAEOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

Abstract

In the forward to this varied and stimulating collection of essays on the archaeology of the southern Levant from the Palaeolithic to the present day, Thomas Levy (p. xvii) recalls how his 1998 edited volume The Archaeology of Society in the Holy Land was praised by Kent Flannery for helping the Old Testament meet the New Archaeology. Sketching an agenda for the 21st century, Levy emphasises five new or revamped themes: transdisciplinary research; the application of science to historical biblical archaeology; ‘cyber-archaeology’; high-precision dating; and climatic and environmental approaches. For Levy, social archaeology ‘aims at the ‘big picture’ of what happens in society, how it happened, how it changes, and how it is reflected in the archaeological (material culture) record’ (p. xvii). Yet, even by the time Levy 1998 was published, ‘social archaeology’ was being defined in much broader terms, reflecting a range of post-modern and post-colonial paradigms. Among other things, this ‘turn’ sought to interrogate basic methodologies (especially positivism and presentism) and to question accepted social categories (such as personhood, gender, ethnicity, race), as well as to investigate how archaeological discourse was distorted by contemporary and/or Western or colonial attitudes and epistemologies. This expanded understanding of social archaeology is introduced in the editors’ prologue to the present volume, though it is applied somewhat unevenly throughout the text, and in some cases not really addressed at all. This is not helped by the uneven presentation of material culture and archaeological contexts, or of maps and chronological charts to allow easy comparison across a highly compartmentalised structure. The book cannot, therefore, be regarded as a handbook, or indeed, as an entirely satisfactory guide for scholars working outside the discipline, whose questions on a range of topics will not be readily answered. Finally, the reality that the volume is really about the southern Levant is relegated to a footnote on p. 5 — the editors imply that the volume began with broader aims, retaining the, presumably, more marketable title. The first four sections, 26 essays in total, provide a chronological narrative beginning with the ‘dawn’ of human presence in the region, with some thematic interludes: Shahack-Gross, for example, discusses the social and technological implications of fire from the Palaeolithic to the Iron Age (Chapter 5), whilst Sheridan focuses on comingled human bone assemblages in the Bronze Age, Iron Age and Byzantine periods (Chapter 11). The overall chronological coverage of the volume is impressive, from the Lower Palaeolithic to the Frankish period. Levy 1998 made it down to the British Mandate, though the present volume covers some aspects of the latter through the lenses of excavation histories, colonialism and modern heritage (Chapters 32 and 33) which raise important contemporary issues. The chapters of Part One grapple in various ways with the very nature of human society, touching upon the complexity and limitations of the datasets from Palaeolithic contexts (Chapters 1 (Rollefson) and 2 (Belfer-Cohen and Goring-Morris)), as well as the diverse and disputed pathways towards sedentism and social complexity in the Epipalaeolithic and early Neolithic (Munro and Grosman, Chapter 3). Moving forwards in time, Finlayson (Chapter 4) discusses the complex relationships between increased sedentism (or at least ‘investment in place’), the nature and social implications of settlement architecture, and broader economic strategies during the Neolithic period; stressing the importance of community and collective agency whilst identifying incremental shifts towards individual households— if not actually individuals — by the PPNB. Chapter 5 (Banning) questions the once embedded notion of the late Neolithic as a kind of Dark Age that interrupted PPNB trajectories towards urbanism; he also provides one of the few explicit discussions of gender distinctions and associated labour roles, while subtly highlighting the importance of quotidian food practices, as opposed to rare events such as feasts, in social formation. The final two chapters of Part One focus on the Chalcolithic. Chapter 7 (Rowan) contrasts the relatively simple nature of settlement forms and
黎凡特的社会考古学。从史前到现在
托马斯·利维(Thomas Levy,第xvii页)在这本关于旧石器时代至今黎凡特南部考古的丰富而刺激的散文集之前,回忆了他1998年编辑的《圣地社会考古》一书是如何因帮助《旧约》与新考古相遇而受到肯特·弗兰纳里的赞扬的。在勾画21世纪的议程时,Levy强调了五个新的或经过修改的主题:跨学科研究;科学在历史圣经考古中的应用网络考古;高精度测年;以及气候和环境方法。对Levy来说,社会考古学“旨在了解社会中发生的事情、它是如何发生的、它是怎样变化的,以及它如何反映在考古(物质文化)记录中”(第xvii页)。然而,即使在Levy 1998出版时,“社会考古学”的定义也要宽泛得多,反映了一系列后现代和后殖民主义范式。除其他外,这种“转向”试图质疑基本方法论(尤其是实证主义和存在主义),质疑公认的社会类别(如人格、性别、种族、种族),并调查考古话语是如何被当代和/或西方或殖民主义的态度和认识论扭曲的。在本卷的编辑序言中介绍了对社会考古学的这种扩展理解,尽管它在整个文本中的应用有些不均衡,在某些情况下根本没有得到真正的解决。物质文化和考古背景的不均衡呈现,或者地图和时序图的不均衡展示,都无助于在高度划分的结构中进行简单的比较。因此,这本书不能被视为一本手册,或者说,对于在学科之外工作的学者来说,不能被视是一本完全令人满意的指南,因为他们在一系列主题上的问题都不会很容易得到回答。最后,这本书实际上是关于南黎凡特的,这一事实被放在了第5页的脚注中——编辑们暗示这本书一开始就有更广泛的目标,保留了可能更具市场价值的标题。前四节共26篇文章,以人类在该地区存在的“黎明”为开端,提供了一个按时间顺序排列的叙事,并穿插了一些主题:例如,Shahack Gross讨论了从旧石器时代到铁器时代火灾的社会和技术影响(第5章),而Sheridan则关注青铜时代混杂的人类骨骼组合,铁器时代和拜占庭时期(第11章)。从旧石器时代晚期到法兰克时期,该卷的总体时间覆盖范围令人印象深刻。Levy 1998将其归结为英国托管,尽管本卷通过挖掘历史、殖民主义和现代遗产的视角涵盖了后者的某些方面(第32章和第33章),这些都提出了重要的当代问题。第一部分的章节以各种方式与人类社会的本质作斗争,涉及旧石器时代背景下数据集的复杂性和局限性(第一章(Rollefson)和第二章(Belfer Cohen和Goring Morris)),以及在旧石器时代晚期和新石器时代早期走向平定主义和社会复杂性的多样化和有争议的途径(Munro和Grosman,第3章)。随着时间的推移,Finlayson(第4章)讨论了新石器时代日益严重的煽动主义(或至少“就地投资”)、定居点建筑的性质和社会影响以及更广泛的经济战略之间的复杂关系;强调社区和集体机构的重要性,同时确定PPNB向个人家庭(如果不是个人的话)的增量转变。第5章(Banning)质疑了新石器时代晚期作为一种黑暗时代的一度根深蒂固的概念,这种黑暗时代打断了PPNB走向城市化的轨迹;他还提供了为数不多的关于性别差异和相关劳动角色的明确讨论之一,同时巧妙地强调了日常饮食习惯在社会形成中的重要性,而不是盛宴等罕见事件。第一部分的最后两章主要论述了铜器。第7章(罗文)对比了定居形式和
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
Levant
Levant ARCHAEOLOGY-
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
25.00%
发文量
26
期刊介绍: Levant is the international peer-reviewed journal of the Council for British Research in the Levant (CBRL), a British Academy-sponsored institute with research centres in Amman and Jerusalem, but which also supports research in Syria, Lebanon and Cyprus. Contributions from a wide variety of areas, including anthropology, archaeology, geography, history, language and literature, political studies, religion, sociology and tourism, are encouraged. While contributions to Levant should be in English, the journal actively seeks to publish papers from researchers of any nationality who are working in its areas of interest.
×
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