MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED OR SOLD

Archaeologies of Art

DOMINGO_FM.indd 1

2/27/2008 3:10:31 PM

MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED OR SOLD

One World Archaeology Series Sponsored by the World Archaeological Congress Series Editors: Joan Gero, Mark Leone, and Robin Torrence One World Archaeology volumes contain carefully edited selections of the exemplary papers presented at the World Archaeology Congress (WAC), held every four years, and intercongress meetings. WAC gives place to considerations of power and politics in framing archaeological questions and results. The organization also gives place and privilege to minorities who have often been silenced or regarded as beyond capable of making main line contributions to the eld. All royalties from the series are used to help the wider work of the organization. The series is published by Left Coast Press, Inc., beginning with volume 48.
58 Managing Archaeological Resources, Francis P. McManamon, Andrew Stout, and Jodi A. Barnes (eds.) 57 Landscapes of Clearance, Angle P. Smith and Amy Gazin-Schwartz (eds.) 56 Underwater and Maritime Archaeology in Latin America and the Caribbean, Margaret E. Leshikar-Denton and Pilar Luna Erreguerena (eds.) 55 Archaeologies of Art, Ins Domingo Sanz, Dnae Fiore, and Sally K. May (eds.) 54 Archaeology and Capitalism, Yannis Hamilakis and Philip Duke (eds.) 53 Living Under the Shadow, John Grattan and Robin Torrence (eds.) 52 Envisioning Landscapes, Dan Hicks, Laura McAtackney, and Graham Fairclough (eds.) 51 Rethinking Agriculture, Timothy P. Denham, Jos Iriarte, Luc Vrydaghs (eds.) 50 A Fearsome Heritage, John Schoeld and Wayne Cocroft (eds.) 49 Archaeology to Delight and Instruct, Heather Burke and Claire Smith (eds.) 48 African Re-Genesis, Jay B. Haviser and Kevin C. MacDonald (eds.)

Previous volumes in this series, available from Routledge: 47 Indigenous Archaeologies 46 Archaeologies of the British 45 Natural Disasters and Cultural Change 44 Materiel Culture 43 The Dead and their Possessions 42 Illicit Antiquities 41 Destruction and Conservation of Cultural Property 40 Madness, Disability & Social Exclusion 39 The Archaeology of Dry lands 38 The Archaeology of Difference 37 Time and Archaeology 36 The Constructed Past 35 Archaeology and Language IV 34 Archaeology and Language III 33 Cultural Resource Management in Contemporary Society 32 Prehistory of Food 31 Historical Archaeology 30 The Archaeology and Anthropology of Landscape 29 Archaeology and Language II 28 Early Human Behaviour in the Global Context 27 Archaeology and Language I 26 Time, Process and Structured Transformation in Archaeology 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 The Presented Past Social Construction of the Past Sacred Sites, Sacred Places Tropical Archaeobotany Archaeology and the Information Age The Archaeology of Africa Origins of Human Behaviour From the Baltic to the Black Sea The Excluded Past Signifying Animals Hunters of the Recent Past Whats New? Foraging and Farming The Politics of the Past Centre and Periphery Archaeological Approaches to Cultural Identity Archaeological Heritage Management in the Modem World Conict in the Archaeology of Living Traditions Animals into Art The Meaning of Things Who Needs the Past? State and Society Domination and Resistance The Walking Larder What is an Animal?

DOMINGO_FM.indd 2

2/27/2008 3:10:32 PM

MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED OR SOLD

Archaeologies of Art
Time, Place, and Identity

Edited by Ins Domingo Sanz, Dnae Fiore, and Sally K. May

Walnut Creek, CA

DOMINGO_FM.indd 3

2/27/2008 3:10:32 PM

MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED OR SOLD

LEFT COAST PRESS, INC. 1630 North Main Street, #400 Walnut Creek, California 94596 http://www.LCoastPress.com Copyright 2008 by Left Coast Press, Inc. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior permission of the publisher. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Archaeologies of art: time, place, and identity/edited by Ins Domingo Sanz, Dnae Fiore, and Sally K. May. p. cm. (One world archaeology) Includes index. ISBN 978-1-59874264-0 (hardback : alk. paper) 1. PetroglyphsCase studies. 2. Rock paintingsCase studies. I. Domingo Sanz, Ins. II. Fiore, Dnae. III. May, Sally K. GN799.P4A72 2008 709.0113dc22 2007044311

Printed in the United States of America

The paper used in this publication meets the minimum requirements of American National Standard for Information SciencesPermanence of Paper for Printed Library Materials, ANSI/NISO Z39.481992.

08 09 10 11 5 4 3 2 1 Cover design: Joanna Ebenstein

DOMINGO_FM.indd 4

2/27/2008 3:10:32 PM

MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED OR SOLD

Contents

List of Illustrations Acknowledgments 1 Archaeologies of Art: Time, Place, and Identity in Rock Art, Portable Art, and Body Art Ins Domingo Sanz, Dnae Fiore, and Sally K. May Space and Discourse As Constituents of Past Identities The Case of Namibian Rock Art Tilman Lenssen-Erz Rocks of Ages: Petroglyphs, Pictographs, and Identity in Puerto Rico Peter G. Roe and Michele H. Hayward Rock Art, Modes of Production, and Social Identities during the Early Formative Period in the Atacama Desert (Northern Chile) Francisco Gallardo and Patricio De Souza From the Form to the Artists: Changing Identities in Levantine Rock Art (Spain) Ins Domingo Sanz Memoried Sacredness and International Elite Identities: The Late Postclassic at La Casa de las Golondrinas, Guatemala Eugenia J. Robinson Same Tradition, Different Views: The Ca Valley Rock Art and Social Identity Lus Lus and Marcos Garca Dez Learning Art, Learning Culture: Art, Education, and the Formation of New Artistic Identities in Arnhem Land, Australia Sally K. May Eagles Reach: A Focal Point for Past and Present Social Identity within the Northern Blue Mountains World Heritage Area, Australia Paul S. C. Taon, Matthew Kelleher, Graham King, Wayne Brennan

9 13 15

29

51

79

99

131

151

171

195

DOMINGO_FM.indd 7

2/27/2008 3:10:32 PM

MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED OR SOLD

Contents

10 Panache and Protocol in Australian Aboriginal Art Claire Smith 11 Body Painting and Visual Practice: The Creation of Social Identities through Image Making and Display in Tierra del Fuego (Southern South America) Dnae Fiore About the Contributors Index

215 243

267 273

DOMINGO_FM.indd 8

2/27/2008 3:10:33 PM

MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED OR SOLD

List of Illustrations

Figures
Figure 2.1 Figure 2.2 Figure 2.3 Figure 2.4 Figure 2.5 Figure 3.1 Figure 3.2 Figure 3.3 Figure 3.4 Figure 3.5 Figure 3.6 Figure 4.1 Map showing the location of the Brandberg/ Daureb Rock art panel from Circus Gorge in the Brandberg A rock art site in the Brandberg/Daureb mountains Site Hungorob 2 is a typical waymark A rock art site in the Brandberg/Daureb Selected anthropomorphic images from various rock art sites in Puerto Rico Selected zoomorphic and abstract images from various rock art sites in Puerto Rico Sequence of Puerto Rican rock art Modern Artisan Fair in Puerto Rico A roadside sculpture by a Puerto Rican artisan The cover of the Diccionario Taino Ilustrado by Edwin Miner Sol Distribution of the Taira Tulan and Conuencia styles in the Atacama region (Northern Chile) Clay pipe; San Francisco Culture (1500400 B.C.E.), Northwest Argentina Incomplete camelid Taira Tulan style (engraved) in superposition over camelids Conuencia style (red ochre) Hunters painted with spear thrower and darts and camelids Engraved Taira Tuln Style Geographical distribution of Levantine rock art (Spain) Variations in the Levantine human gures Themes represented in the Centelles horizon and the Civil type Themes represented in the Mas den Josep and Cingle type 32 33 36 39 44 53 54 58 69 70 71 80

Figure 4.2 Figure 4.3

84 86

Figure 4.4 Figure 4.5 Figure 5.1 Figure 5.2 Figure 5.3 Figure 5.4

88 89 101 108 109 112

DOMINGO_FM.indd 9

2/27/2008 3:10:33 PM

MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED OR SOLD

10

List of Illustrations

Figure 5.5 Figure 5.6 Figure 5.7 Figure 6.1 Figure 6.2 Figure 6.3 Figure 6.4

Figure 7.1

Figure 7.2 Figure 7.3 Figure 7.4 Figure 8.1 Figure 8.2 Figure 8.3 Figure 8.4 Figure 8.5 Figure 8.6 Figure 8.7 Figure 8.8 Figure 8.9 Figure 8.10 Figure 8.11 Figure 8.12 Figure 8.13 Figure 8.14

Themes represented in the Lineal type Sequence of Levantine human motifs Evolution of some formal features The sites and towns in the southern Kaqchikel area Suns motifs, eastern area of La Casa de las Golondrinas The Mexican paintings in Area B of La Casa de las Golondrinas Sanguayaba Unslipped: Sanguayaba Variety cache jar, seed spindle whorl, and two gourd bowls The Palaeolithic and Modern rock art sites and the Upper Palaeolithic occupation sites in the Ca Valley (Portugal) Penascosa, panel 3 Partial view of Rego da Vide, panel 5 Newspaper article that rst published the Ca rock art Rock painting from western Arnhem Land in X-ray style Wet season bark shelter from Mangalod on the Mann River, Central Arnhem Land Artists working at the Kunbarlanja art centre 2005 Total number of artworks by male age group Thompson Yulidjirri 2003 Painting by Thompson Yulidjirri 2003 Painting by Thompson Yulidjirri 2003 Waralak Men by Thompson Yulidjirri 2003 Turtle and Echidna Story by Thompson Yulidjirri 2003 Namarrkon by Thompson Yulidjirri 2003 Waralak Men by Joey Nganjmirra 2003 Blue Tongue Lizard Story by Joey Nganjmirra 2003 Ngalyod and Yawk Yawk by Joey Nganjmirra 2003 Ngalyod, Yawk Yawk and sh by Joey Nganjmirra 2003

114 116 118 132 140 142 145

153

154 155 162 174 175 178 178 181 183 183 184 185 185 186 186 187 187

DOMINGO_FM.indd 10

2/27/2008 3:10:33 PM

MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED OR SOLD

List of Illustrations

11

Figure 8.15 Figure 9.1 Figure 9.2

Two brown snakes by Joey Nganjmirra 2003 Drawings and stencils at Eagles Reach Animal-human composite creature at Eagles Reach Figure 9.3 The main eagle at Eagles Reach Figure 9.4 Graham King being smoked by Brett Allen near Eagles Reach Figure 10.1 Barunga region, Northern Territory, Australia Figure 10.2 Transformational relationships Figure 10.3 The broad distribution of art forms according to artist Figure 10.4 The broad distribution of modes according to artist Figure 10.5 The discrete distribution of modes according to artist Figure 10.6 The discrete distribution of art forms according to artist Figure 10.7 Bird carving made by Fred Blitner Figure 10.8 The panache of Paddy Fordham Figure Figure 10.9 Painting on linoleum by Paddy Fordham Figure 10.10 Lorrkorn made by Peter Manabaru Figure 10.11 Distribution of features according to the context of distribution Figure 11.1 Map of the Fueguian societies territories Figure 11.2 Yayosh painting Lakutaia Figure 11.3 Ymana man painted and masked as a spirit during the kina ceremony Figure 11.4 Selknam men painted and masked as Soorte spirits during the hain

188 200 201 205 210 216 220 223 224 226 227 228 230 231 234 236 244 254 258 261

Tables
Table 3.1 Table 4.1 Table 5.1 Cultural Chronology of Puerto Rico Comparison of Main Characteristics between Conuencia and Taira Tulan styles Evolution of the Subject Matter in Levantine Rock Art According to the Different Human Types Radiocarbon Dates of La Casa de las Golondrinas 55 86 123

Table 6.1

133

DOMINGO_FM.indd 11

2/27/2008 3:10:33 PM

MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED OR SOLD

12

List of Illustrations

Table 8.1 Table 8.2 Table 8.3

Table 10.1 Table 10.2 Table 10.3

Paintings on Paper by Subject Category Bark Paintings by Subject Category Table Illustrating the Total Number of Each Subject Category for Both A4- and Half-SheetSized Paper Frequency of Motif Use According to Number of Artists Length of lorrkons According to Individual Artists Number of Motif Types Used in Different Contexts of Distribution

190 190 191

225 232 236

DOMINGO_FM.indd 12

2/27/2008 3:10:33 PM

MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED OR SOLD

Acknowledgments

This book was originally inspired by the theme Art and Social Identity presented at the World Archaeological Congress (WAC) in Washington D.C. in 2003. Although this book was inspired by this conference theme, we desired it to represent more than simply a collection of conference papers. Contributions were solicited from researchers (a number of whom were not involved in the WAC conference) who could bring new and exciting ideas to these issues of archaeology, art, time, place, and identity by presenting results of new or previously unpublished research, rather than general overviews. The making of this book has been a lengthy process, and we have many people to thank. First, we thank the World Archaeological Congress publication committee for having faith in us and Professor Claire Smith for her encouragement and for bringing the three of us together as editors of this book. Second, we would like to thank Professor Mark Leone for his support throughout the last three years. Third, we would like to thank all the people whose comments have improved the quality of the book, either the content or the language, especially the external reviewers and Dr. Heather Burke. Finally, we would like to thank all the contributors to this book for their enthusiasm, diligence, and patience. We hope you are proud of the outcome. Although we have worked together on this book for three years, we have never had the opportunity to come together and discuss it in person. The Internet has become our main tool and forum of discussion. Our interest in the ways past and present societies reect their identity through their material objects, and especially through different forms of artistic expressions, was forged independently during the elaboration of our respective Ph.D.s, focused on rock art, body art, and contemporary Aboriginal art from Spain, Argentina, and Australia. Thus this was an individual journey for each of us, and we have different people to thank. Dr. Ins Domingo Sanz would like to thank all the people who contributed to shape her view on the topic of style and rock art during this period. Her theoretical background has been enriched by the suggestions of Professor Valentn Villaverde, Professor Claire Smith, and Dr. Margaret Conkey. She also wants to thank Professor Claire Smith, Gary Jackson, and Dr. Sally K. May for sharing their knowledge about the role of rock art in current Aboriginal communities of Arnhem Land and the Aboriginal people from those communities (Wugularr, Barunga, and Kunbarlanja) for changing her view about the importance of the social context for
13

DOMINGO_FM.indd 13

2/27/2008 3:10:33 PM

MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED OR SOLD

14

Acknowledgments

the interpretation of rock art and its spatial distribution. The predoctoral fellowship V Segles from the University of Valencia (Spain) and the Beca Postdoctoral de Excelencia de la Generalitat Valenciana held at Flinders University (Adelaide, Australia) have provided the nancial support to invest time in the compilation of this book. To work together with Dr. Dnae Fiore and Dr. Sally K. May for the last three years has been a great experience and has provided her a great international knowledge on the issue and, of course, friendship. Ins also wants to thank her family and her husband, Ddac Roman, for the time she steals from them to invest in archaeology. Dr. Dnae Fiore would like to thank Luis Orquera and Stephen Shennan for their encouragement and support through so many years and for their continuous interest in the development of her research in general and of this book in particular; Claire Smith for her constant encouragement; and Mark Leone for his relentless commitment to seeing this book come to fruition. She is also very grateful to Julio Caramelo for understanding (and gracefully coping with) what is involved with being married to an archaeologist, and to Fiona Caramelo for the time her mom has stolen from her while working on this book. Finally, Dnae would like to thank Ins and Sally for their generous invitation to coedit this volume with them; this project was their original initiative, and I feel extremely grateful to them for giving me the chance to take part in such a challenging and rewarding venture. Dr. Sally K. May would like to thank Flinders University for their support during the production of this book and she would especially like to acknowledge and thank Duncan Wright and her family for their support and encouragement over the years it took to produce this book. Sally would like to individually thank Claire Smith and Paul S. C. Taon, for their ongoing academic support and friendship. Finally, Dr. May thanks, most sincerely, Dnae and Ins for their understanding and support during production of this book and for inspiring her with their ability to handle academic careers, students, husbands, babies, and sometimes sickness, all at the same time. This book is evidence of your resilience and determination.

DOMINGO_FM.indd 14

2/27/2008 3:10:33 PM

MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED OR SOLD

CHAPTER 1
Archaeologies of Art: Time, Place, and Identity in Rock Art, Portable Art, and Body Art
Ins Domingo Sanz, Dnae Fiore, and Sally K. May

Time, place, and identity are some of the main issues archaeologists try to confront through the empirical and analytical study of visual arts (rock art, portable art, and body art). The classical view of these archaeological remains as art for arts sake, created by a gifted individual or having a specic/unique aesthetic quality (for example, Reinach in Ucko and Rosenfeld 1967) is no longer supported in the academic arena. Just as with any other archaeological remains, visual arts are lled with signicance and encode many levels of information about the identity of the artists and their sociocultural context. This information can be more or less successfully decoded through different ways of doing archaeology, understood as the study of past societies through the analysis of their material culture. Archaeological evidence is usually debris of human activities, often scattered fragments resulting from abandonment or destruction. However, the three particular artistic endeavours analysed in this book rock art (images painted or engraved on rocks), portable art (decorated artefacts or artefacts shaped with specic forms), and body art (images painted or tattooed on the body) are more than discarded fragments of human activity. They are both a reection of, and a constructing force behind, human culture. Likewise, even if it is internationally accepted that the meaning of the message of past art traditions (particularly when they are prehistoric) is inaccessible in the present, there are enough data hidden in the motifs to place them in cultural, spatial, and temporal contexts. Considered within this context, this book unites international case studies to explore questions of time, place, and identity through the archaeological and ethnoarchaeological analysis of rock art, contemporary Aboriginal art, and body art. The long and ongoing debate about the misuse and in/appropriateness of the term art for past and nonWestern images is not central to this book (see Anati 2002; Conkey and
15

DOMINGO_CH_01.indd 15

2/27/2008 3:06:54 PM

MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED OR SOLD

16

Chapter 1

Hastorf 1990; Fiore 1996; Layton 1991; Leroi-Gourhan 1964; Ucko and Rosenfeld 1967; among others), and the term is broadly used throughout the chapters as a common denominator of the wide realm of images created and viewed by past and present human groups in different parts of the globe. The chapters in this book reect this openness in attitudes to art and of its relationship to time, place, and identity within an archaeological framework. There is a great diversity of frameworks and analyses reected in these eleven chapters, and these archaeologies (plural) of art show that there are several viewpoints to the issue of how time, place, and identity can be explored through art. At the same time, this selection of chapters shows the limits of each of these viewpoints which, in turn, relates to the nature of the archaeological questioning and to the low visibility of many factors in the archaeological record. In line with this, tackling the issue of, for example, identity in art does not involve imagining situations but rather tying interpretations and theories to material correlates. Archaeology can contribute considerably more to the study of art than picture books and pseudoscience.

Archaeologies versus Archaeology

Plurality is one of the main notions this book embraces, and connotations of this are invoked by each of the concepts tackled in this volume. The word art, even if singular, involves the wide range of visual forms in which artistic creations can be shaped, including the three main artistic endeavours analysed through this volume, rock art, body art, and portable art. Time is conceived in different ways by different cultures, be it lineal, cyclic, spiral, or simply disregarded as a factor affecting reality (Bailey 1983; Garcia Canclini 1986; Gosden 1994; Ridley 1994; Rowlands 1993; Shanks and Tilley 1987). Approaching such variety of conceptions about time through a contemporary perspective is clearly a challenge. The picture becomes even more complex when it is considered that archaeologists deal with fragmentary pieces of material culture. The eleven chapters in this book represent a small selection of the wide range of temporal phases or periods recognizable in world artistic production. These include the Palaeolithic and the current practices of engravers in Foz Ca (Portugal); the precontact and postcontact artistic traditions of different American populations (Argentina, Chile, Guatemala, Puerto Rico), the Neolithic art of Mediterranean Spain and the Saharan groups; and the current artistic practices of three distinct Australian Aboriginal cultures. In all these cases, time has been conceived more as

DOMINGO_CH_01.indd 16

2/27/2008 3:06:55 PM

MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED OR SOLD

Archaeologies of Art

17

an external analytical framework to plot a specic artistic phenomenon or stylistic sequence (that is, from an etic perspective) than as an internal constituent of art traditions (that is, from an emic perspective). Place can also be culturally conceived and constructed in a number of ways, from its conception as an external, objective, and exclusively material frame for human action to its conception as a subjective, animated being that is an integral part of human existence (for instance, Hernando 2000; Tilley 1994; Ucko and Layton 1999). Again, grasping for the traces of such conceptions in the archaeological remains of art creations is quite a challenge, and this is why most of the chapters in this book have tackled the study of place mainly as a particular position or point in space used for producing, exchanging, or displaying visual arts. Nevertheless, it is also clear that in many chapters, place has been conceived as a sociocultural construction, an active socialization of space that has been brought into cultural life through its visual marking. By selecting case studies from the four continents (Africa/Namibia, America/Argentina/ Chile/Guatemala/Puerto Rico, Europe/Portugal/Spain, and Oceania/ Australia), we encompasses multiple places and landscapes that have been partly constituted through the creation of artistic expressions. We also tackle identity plurally in this book: It is conceived at different scales (from individual to group to society to human species; from motif, to artefact or body or site, to region, and so on). Moreover, it involves both past and present identities of art producers/viewers and present identities of the archaeologists who study them (Hernando 2002; Jones 1997). These latter are regarded in this book as active agents in the construction of knowledge, values, and feelings toward other peoples past and present identities, and, as the chapters of this book clearly show, their involvement in this process requires a degree of selfawareness in order to develop a critical approach to their own work. Thus, by discussing Archaeologies, this book aims to draw attention to the connotation of plurality invoked by each of the mentioned concepts. Moreover, the plural use of the word archaeology is consciously directed to reect the plurality of methods available to archaeologists to address the same archaeological questions related to art, time, place, and identity, and the multiple backgrounds of the researchers contributing to this volume.

Time, Place, and Identity in Focus

Archaeologies of Art aims to understand how artists leave marks of authorship in the work of art: through a plurality of methods used by archaeologists worldwide to interpret this information, those marks of authorship are attributable to specic times, places, and identities.

DOMINGO_CH_01.indd 17

2/27/2008 3:06:55 PM

MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED OR SOLD

18

Chapter 1

The ethnoarchaeological studies in this book provide the framework to observe through informed methods how artists negotiate and construct their individual or group identities through the creation, display, and consumption of rock, portable, and body art (see chapters by Smith; May; Taon, Kelleher, King, and Brennan; and Fiore). The archaeological studies of rock art illustrate how the material evidence provides the tools to reconstruct the identities of societies in the past (see chapters by Lenssen; Gallardo and De Souza; Domingo Sanz; Robinson) and in the present (see chapters by Lus and Garca Dez; and Roe and Hayward). Far from suggesting the use of ethnographic examples as direct analogies to interpret art, this book aims to combine ethnography and archaeology to create a more critical and scientic methodology for the archaeological study of visual arts. The ethnoarchaeological chapters in this book also avoid the use of ethnography as a source of cautionary tales, since these serve mainly to pinpoint ambiguous factors in material culture patterning but usually do not provide methodological tools to break down such ambiguity and move forward toward the systematic interpretation of such patterns. Ethnography is then viewed both as a way of constructing knowledge about the material correlates of creating and displaying visual arts and as a medium to test archaeological methods for studying visual arts: Both aspects help to create awareness about the depth and the limitations of archaeological knowledge. The marks of authorship left by ancient or recent artists are also combined with the marks of authorship left by archaeologists when studying them: this book aims to develop a sense of awareness about the fact that social identity is not just a past process xed in time and space but that it is also rather a malleable process inuenced by the archaeologists who are researching it. The different manners in which the issue of art and identity are tackled through the eleven chapters of this book are, indeed, a tangible way of demonstrating that social identity is also inextricably involved in each authors way of doing science. Within this framework, the unity of the book is given by a series of key questions addressed by the contributors from their different archaeological or ethnoarchaeological perspectives and case studies:

How is social identity constructed and/or reproduced by art? What are the scopes and the limitations of the use of this concept in the archaeologies of art? What type of evidence is relevant, and which kind of analyses are required? To what extent do we as archaeologists create an identity for past and present-day people who create/d rock art, portable art, or body art? What is the role of living art producers and/or people related to ancient art producers in the current construction of these identities?

DOMINGO_CH_01.indd 18

2/27/2008 3:06:55 PM

MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED OR SOLD

Archaeologies of Art

19

To address these questions, the material aspects of identity are the main source of information. It is accepted that these material aspects of identity will have a certain spatial and temporal distribution (which may or may not be archeologically recognisable) and will be liable to change in place and in time. Furthermore, the material aspects of social identity are not only distributed through time and space; the ways in which space and time are conceived, perceived, and manipulated are constitutive of identity, too.

Constructing Time Frames, Revealing Time Conceptions

As noted above, time can be addressed in archaeology from an etic perspective, that is, centred on the archaeologists own concepts, and from an emic perspective, which intends to grasp some of the implications of other peoples conceptions of time which are usually different from those held by the researcher. The chapters in this book conceive time mainly as an external framework to locate art diachronically and are thus based on an etic, western perspective. Yet this does not mean that the concept of time has remained unchallenged measuring time and placing art forms within a chronological context has been a concern for archaeologists worldwide. From the very beginning, relative sequences for both portable and rock art have been proposed on the basis of stratigraphic superimpositions, stylistic comparison, and depicted content (extinct animal species, depicted weapons, and so forth). Radiocarbon dating brought about a revolution between 1940 and 1970, and one could argue that obtaining absolute dates for some archaeological remains initially degraded the role of rock art as a valuable source of information about past cultural systems. Especially in North America, only a few archaeologists, artists, and avocationalists kept some interest in rock art while most archaeologists largely abandoned rock art studies on behalf of other datable archaeological remains (Keyser 2001:117). But the interest in relative sequences of rock art and portable art was kept in Europe, South Africa, Australia, and South America, providing useful analyses reecting the changing identities of the artists in time and place (Chaloupka 1993; Domingo 2005; Gonzlez 1977; Leroi-Gourhan 1964; Schobinger and Gradin 1985; Villaverde 1994; and so on). A second crisis for the relative dating of art forms (especially rock art) occurred in the 1990s, with the rst direct dating of pigments and engravings (see Lorblanchet and Bahn 1993; Rosenfeld and Smith 1997). The use of style as a chronological marker was then called into question owing to inconsistencies between absolute dates and stylistic sequences. However, whereas some suggested the revision of

DOMINGO_CH_01.indd 19

2/27/2008 3:06:55 PM

MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED OR SOLD

20

Chapter 1

stylistic sequences (Valladas and Clottes 2003), others demonstrated that radiocarbon dates also have limitations owing to the contamination of samples, the use of old woods and charcoal for painting, and so forth (see Fortea 2002; Pettitt and Bahn 2003; Rowe 2001; Steelman et al. 2005). In this context, relative methods of dating art forms are still useful to provide an order of styles and traditions. And, despite the difculties in establishing their chronometric duration, the validity of relative methods for the archaeological interpretation of temporality and the role of visual arts for studying the evolution of past societies cannot be denied. Time absolute and relative, scientic and social is one of the necessary frames to conduct an archaeological study of social identities. Therefore, more than keeping the opposition between absolute and relative time, the perspective developed in this book suggests that both systems should be complementary to address the long- or shortterm dynamics involved in artistic traditions. This predominant concept of time as a chronological framework does not provide direct information about the ways in which it was conceived by other peoples in the past, nor of the manner in which it was involved in art creation and use. This situation is probably due to the fact that the archaeological visibility of past and/or foreign time conceptions is considerably low, particularly when one is dealing with prehistoric contexts. Nevertheless, it is interesting to note that some subtle inferences about emic time conceptions have been drawn by some authors by linking temporality to the actual actions of creating art that entail marking and re-marking space the bedrock, the artefact, the body through visual art (see Lus and Garca Dez; Domingo Sanz; Robinson; Gallardo and De Souza; Fiore). The bedrock, the artefact, the body, can be visually marked only once, but they were often revisited or reused and repainted or reengraved annually, seasonally, or with some other periodicity. Such actions are visual appropriations and constructions of space be it a place, an object, or a person that entail a certain conception of time. Thus, art spaces always imply a sense of time: short or long, lineal or cyclic, mythical or mundane. It is clear that these conceptions are still ambiguous in terms of their archaeological visibility, but the fact that time conceptions can be related to space through the display of visual and visible art opens a window of interesting and challenging analytical possibilities.

Locating Place: Spatial Distribution and Enculturated Landscape

Mapping the geographical continuities and discontinuities between different types of artistic evidences has also been central to establishing the boundaries of cultures and the social interactions among neighbouring

DOMINGO_CH_01.indd 20

2/27/2008 3:06:55 PM

MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED OR SOLD

Archaeologies of Art

21

groups (see Barth 1969; Carr and Neitzel 1995; among others). This is especially achievable through rock art studies, since, unlike other material remains that can be exchanged and traded, rock art is xed in place. It was certainly made and meant for the place where it is found and viewed (Burke and Smith 2004:224). Therefore, it is a relevant source of data to understand the way space was dened and used in a specic sociocultural context, the duration and intensity of the occupation, and how the perception of a specic place changed over time in the construction of social identities (see Lenssen-Erz in this volume). Hence, rock art is more than painted or engraved images; it is also place and landscape (Nash and Chippindale 2001:1). It is used to socialize natural environments or to mark path routes (Bradley 2000; Martnez 2000) and to create cultural and/or symbolic spaces (see Robinson in this volume). Since rock art is inextricably linked to the land (Ross 2001), it can be completely understood only in relation to its landscape, conceived both in environmental and sociocultural terms. Furthermore, the physical location of rock art (visibility, access, topography, monumentality, sounds, proximity to water sources, paths, burials or habitats, and so on), and the morphology of the rock (form, surface, texture, audible properties of the rock, and so forth) can be as symbolically important as the rock art itself. Social spaces were constructed according to certain sets of cultural rules, which regulated what kinds of activities were acceptable at different places in the landscape (Engelmark and Larsson 2005). Therefore, the location of rock art was not usually picked at random, and this is why the recurrent distribution of rock art sites or motifs can be linked to specic sociocultural groups, informing once more about the role of art in the construction of their social identities. Moreover, marking spaces visually creates signicant places and gives them a certain identity; conversely, such marked places become constitutive of the social identity of those who marked them. This is also valid for the visual marks made on the body which is probably one of the smallest and most personal spatial scales within a social group. The creation of body art (be it self-ornament or ornamentation by a third person) and its display in any context can produce individual and group identity for the wearer and the viewer; at the same time, such identity creation can involve the continuation or the interruption of a preexistent tradition, implying a dialectical relationship between identity patterns and social agencies (for example, Faris 1972; Strathern and Strathern 1971; see Fiore in this volume). Furthermore, ephemeral artistic techniques (for instance, body painting) can be used to construct multiple and momentary social identities in a single individuals body along his/her social life, while durable techniques (for example, tattooing, scarication) are by their very materiality oriented toward marking the body in a non-ephemeral manner, and therefore are commonly used

DOMINGO_CH_01.indd 21

2/27/2008 3:06:55 PM

MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED OR SOLD

22

Chapter 1

to inscribe and reinscribe (by addition) long-lasting identities on the body. In this sense, the body can become a very signicant place where social identities can be visually constructed. Finally, the creation and the manipulation of artistic artefacts involve simultaneously two spatial levels: that of the artefact itself and that of the place/s where it was produced, used, maintained, recycled, broken, discarded. Social identity can be inferred from the ways in which the physical space of the artefact has been manipulated as a canvas and/ or as a volume to create images (see May in this volume and Smith in this volume). But the spatial distribution of artefacts as much as that of rock art can also be signicant as a landscape creator and as an identity marker. Time and space are, therefore, two essential concepts for approaching identities, but identities can be conceived only by combining both of them. Understanding spatial variations as markers of ethnicity is a central issue in archaeology, but this should not be an end in itself: beyond the reconstruction of a static picture of cultural traits at a particular point in time, archaeologists need to account for diachronic change in such patterns (Shennan 1989:28). Regional and landscape archaeological studies are helping to go beyond the traditional linear sequences constructed in the past, demonstrating the multiscalar temporalities structuring cultural action. They reect how particular traditions expand or contract through time and how temporal changes do not necessarily synchronize everywhere, so different regions have specic sequences. Both basic concepts constitute the essential framework to construct our next concern: identities.

Discovering Identities: On the Relational Nature of Social Identity

Social identity is one of the central issues of this book, and it is clearly linked with the previous issues of time and space. The most frequent tool to approach identities through archaeology is the concept of style, understood as a way of doing (Hodder 1990; Wiessner 1990) or a characteristic manner of doing something (Sackett 1977:370). Moreover, a style will be dened by a spatial and temporal invariance in a general way of doing, inasmuch regularities and specicities in space and time are particular to a specic epoch and/or region. The long debate on the concept of style has been summarized in different publications (see Carr and Neitzel 1995; Conkey 2006; Conkey and Hastorf 1990; Domingo Sanz 2005; Lorblanchet and Bahn 1993; Wobst 1999; and so on), and this volume pays attention to its relationship with identities in different chapters (see Smith; Gallardo and De Souza;

DOMINGO_CH_01.indd 22

2/27/2008 3:06:55 PM

MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED OR SOLD

Archaeologies of Art

23

Domingo Sanz; Roe and Hayward). If we accept that rock art, portable art, and body art are part of the social mechanisms of identity construction, then we assume that stylistic differences can be used to identify groups and their social identities at different scales. It has long been accepted that style performs a fundamental function in the processes of visual communication and information exchange (Wobst 1977). Style can be dened as the personal and/or group expression of visual communication through created forms (Smith 1996). Yet style is also evident in other less visual aspects of the art-facts such as the choice of techniques (Dietler and Herbich 1994; Gosselain 1998) and the material and/or symbolic function of the artefacts (Sackett 1977:330). The selection of different technologies (canvas, raw materials, tools, processing modes, and so on) is not necessarily constrained by ecological and physical limitations (see Binford 1965) but also closely related to symbolic, religious, economic, and political values (Gosselain 1998:4; LeroiGourhan 1964; Lechtman 1977; and so forth), in line with this, technical actions result from social decisions, which are themselves stylistic. Furthermore, whereas formal and visual styles can be sometimes easily imitated or manipulated, technological styles usually require a deeper learning process and are more difcult to imitate and, therefore, provide relevant information to explore the more durable facets of social identity (Domingo 2005; Fiore 2006; Gosselain 1998:92). Hence, the recurrent use of a specic recipe for painting, a certain kind of brush, and so on, can be evidence of a particular individual or group identity. Similarly, variations in material culture can be conditioned by the function they serve. These functional variations are also stylistic since there is a wide range of equivalent alternatives available to the artists to obtain the same end (Sackett 1990). In other words, different formal features (or even technological features, such as different recipes for pigment, different brushes, and the like) can be selected to create an art-fact with the same function. So even those features of the art-fact that could be considered functional (or selected to accomplish a specic end) can be stylistic, in the sense that there are different options available to the artist to get to the same end and, therefore, the selection he makes, even if functional, is also stylistic. Therefore, the selection of a specic alternative, among all the available options, for a specic function makes this selection stylistic. The coexistence of more than one style with different functions in the same cultural tradition has been mentioned several times (Layton 1991; Schapiro 1953:294) and in the Barunga community (Northern Territory, Australia) materialises in a gurative style used with nonceremonial purposes and in a geometric style restricted to ceremonies (Smith 1996:241). To summarise, a particular way of doing can be identied either in the formal and decorative attributes, or in the functional or technological

DOMINGO_CH_01.indd 23

2/27/2008 3:06:55 PM

MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED OR SOLD

24

Chapter 1

aspects of an art-fact, since it can appear in any stage of the operative chain of art production and use. The nature and the signicance of stylistic variations are closely related with the nature and intentions of the social identities of the artists. These social identities can refer either to the identication of a group, conceived by Wiessner as emblemic style (1983) and by Macdonald (1990) as protocol, or the identication of individuals, addressed by Wiessners assertive style category (1983) and by Macdonalds panache category (1990). Approaches to both kinds of processes emblemic and assertive; protocol and panache shed light on human agency and social identity and can be made through the study of material culture in general (for example, Dobres 2000) and through art analysis in particular (see Smith; May; Taon, Kelleher, King, and Brennan; Roe and Hayward; Fiore in this volume). Clearly, interpreting these two different forms of identity in the archaeological record is complex, especially since more than one identity will arise and overlap in any given social group (depending on ethnicity, gender, age, occupation, class, and so on). In this book, social identity is conceived as a twofold construction, since it could be created through self-ascription or through ascription by others (Bonl 1972; Diaz 1981, 1984). The former involves the self-identication of an individual with a group, whereas the latter refers to the recognition of individuals in a group either by the members of the group or by outsiders, including the archaeologists who study their material culture. In addition, self-ascription can be conscious or unconscious, since individuals are not necessarily aware that reproducing certain patterns relates them to a specic group (see also the concepts of Isochrestic Variation and Iconological Approach dened by Sackett 1982:82). On the contrary, ascription by others does require a conscious and intentional factor, since it entails awareness in the recognition of people as pertaining to a certain group. Nevertheless, the archaeological recognition of features revealing the identity of individuals/groups does not necessarily require the claim that such features were intentionally manipulated as identity-badges by people in the past. The chapters in this book show how art is involved in the construction of identity through both processes. Whereas current indigenous groups often use artistic production to dene their identity in opposition to others (self-ascription) (see chapters by Smith; May; Lus and Garca Dez), archaeologists create sets of features from rock art to recognize different identities or groups of people (ascription by others) (see chapter by Domingo Sanz). The creation and maintenance of social identity operates mainly by opposition, since any ascription to a group (by self and/or by others) implies non-ascription to other groups (see Palaeolithic versus nonPalaeolithic in Lus and Garca Dezs chapter; hunter-gatherers versus shepherds in Gallardo and De Souza; or Selknam versus Ymana in

DOMINGO_CH_01.indd 24

2/27/2008 3:06:55 PM

MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED OR SOLD

Archaeologies of Art

25

Fiore). At the same time, dening what a particular identity involves requires us to dene what such identity does not entail, and sometimes those differences are not well dened, generating many grey areas between them (for an in-depth discussion about complementary opposition, see Roe and Hayward in this volume). Depending on the kind of materials manipulated in the creation and reproduction of gender, age, ethnic and/or other groups, some social identities have a higher archaeological visibility than others. The challenge is how to disentangle and study them through the archaeological record. To face such a challenge, the chapters in this book provide examples of the application of two different and combinable strategies. In the rst place, it is essential to explicitly dene the concepts and criteria through which social identity will be explored in the archaeological-artistic record. This entails explaining which variables are considered relevant for the aims of each researcher (form, technique, subject matters, patterns of composition, spatial distribution in the site or in the landscape, and so forth) and justifying such relevance in each specic study. Since there is no unique and common key for all the components of the material culture, the variables transmitting this social information will diverge according to the materials analysed, and the geographical and sociocultural scale of each study. In the second place, the concepts need to be tied in with empirical implications that shed light on their visibility in material culture patterns, tendencies and/or odd cases (not everything relevant comes in a pattern, and odd cases can be as informative as the neatest tendency). Such an explicit relationship between concepts and material culture is what then helps to argue for the archaeological visibility of social identity in art. This book shows that both strategies are not faced in the same manner by every author, which is clearly a reection of the different academic traditions and identities of the authors as social agents. Nevertheless, such heterogeneity does not mean that we endorse the anything goes perspective that fosters extreme relativism; on the contrary, we suggest that making the research criteria explicit and searching for nexus between concepts and data is a fruitful manner of developing both archaeological knowledge and academic self-awareness.

Concluding Remarks
This book represents a sample of the different ways in which discussions of time, place, and identity can be addressed through the archaeological study of visual arts. The central idea of this volume is that the concept of identity (individual or group) is a social reality that can be shaped only by attending to a specic time and place and in opposition to others.

DOMINGO_CH_01.indd 25

2/27/2008 3:06:56 PM

MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED OR SOLD

26

Chapter 1

Either consciously or unconsciously this identity leaves tangible traces in material culture and, therefore, in its archaeological remains: Such traces can be read by archaeologists to construct past identities and to shed light on the involvement of art in this process. Overall, this book draws together new international research to reveal the changing ways archaeologists are studying art and the new information about past societies that is emerging through these changing archaeologies. The ten archaeological studies contained in this book highlight the high standard of research being undertaken by archaeologists studying art around the world and the role of art in approaching questions of social identity. Finally, the study of art has a long and complex history dotted with pseudoscience, eccentric explorers, and fanatical art enthusiasts, but, more signicantly, the archaeological study of art in all its facets continues to enhance our understanding of human cultural activities throughout the ages.

References
Anati, E. 2002. Lo stile come fatoore diagnostico nellarte preistorica. Italia: Centro Camuno di Studi Preistorici, 112 pp. Bailey, G. 1983. Concepts of time in quaternary prehistory, Annual Review of Anthropology 12:16592. Barth, F. 1969. Ethnic Groups and Boundaries. London: Unwin. Binford, L. R. 1965. Archaeological systematics and the study of cultural process. Reprinted in L. R. Binford, An Archaeological Perspective. New York: Academic Press, 195207. Bonl, G. 1972. El concepto de indio en Amrica: una categora de la situacin colonial, Anales de Antropologa 9:10521. Bradley, R. 2000. The Signicance of Natural Places. London: Routledge. Burke, H., and C. Smith. 2004. The Archaeologists Field Handbook. New South Wales: Allen and Unwin. Carr, C., and J. E. Neitzel (ed.). 1995. Style, Society and Person. Archaeological and Ethnological Perspectives. London: Plenum Press. Chaloupka, G. 1993. Journey in Time: The Worlds Longest Continuing Art Tradition. Sydney: Reed. Conkey, M. 2006. Style, design and function. In Ch. Tilley, W. Keane, S. KuechlerFogden, M. Rowlands, and P. Spyer (eds.), The Handbook of Material Culture. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 35572. Conkey, M., and C. Hastorf (eds.). 1990. The Uses of Style in Archaeology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 124 pp. Diaz, H. 1981. Etna, clase y cuestin nacional, Revista mexicana de ciencias polticas y sociales XXVII(103):10120. . 1984. Notas terico-metodolgicas para el estudio de la cuestin tnica, Boletn de Antropologa Americana 10:4552. Dietler, M., and I. Herbich. 1994. Ceramics and ethnic identity: Ethnoarchaeological observations on the distribution of pottery styles and the relationship between the social context of production and consumption, Terre Cuite et Societ: La Ceramique, Document Technique, Economique, Cultural. XIV Reconcontres Internationales dArchologie et dHistoire dAntibes. Juan-les Pins. Ediciones APDCA.

DOMINGO_CH_01.indd 26

2/27/2008 3:06:56 PM

MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED OR SOLD

Archaeologies of Art

27

Dobres, M. A. 2000. Technology and Social Agency: Outlining a Practice Framework for Archaeology. Oxford: Blackwell Publisher. Domingo Sanz, I. 2005. Tcnica y ejecucin de la gura en el Arte Rupestre Levantino. Hacia una denicin actualizada del concepto de estilo: Validez y limitaciones. Valencia: Servei de Publicacions de la Universitat de Valncia, 457 pp. (CD). Engelmark, R., and T. B. Larsson. 2005. Rock art and environment: Toward increased contextual understanding. In M. Santos and A. Troncoso, Reexiones sobre Arte Rupestre: paisaje, forma y contenido. Tapa 33. Santiago de Compostela: Instituto de Estudios Galegos Padre Sarmiento, 11322. Faris, J. 1972. Nuba Personal Art. London: Duckworth. Fiore, D. 1996. El arte rupestre como producto complejo de procesos econmicos e ideolgicos: Una propuesta de anlisis, Espacio, Tiempo y Forma. Serie I. Prehistoria y Arqueologa 9:23959. . 2006. Poblamiento de imgenes: Arte rupestre y colonizacin de la Patagonia. Variabilidad y ritmos de cambio en tiempo y espacio. In D. Fiore and M. Podest (eds.), Tramas en la Piedra. Produccin y usos del arte rupestre. Buenos Aires: INAPL and WAC World Archaeological Congress, 4361. Fortea, F. J. 2002. Trente-neuf dates C14-SMA pour lart parital paleolithique des Asturies, Bulletin de la Socit Prhistorique Arige-Pyrnes LVII:728. Garcia Canclini, N. 1986. La Produccion Simbolica. Teoria y Metodo en Sociologia del Arte. Mxico: Siglo XXI. Gonzlez, A. R. 1977. Arte precolombino de la Argentina. Buenos Aires: Filmediciones Valero. Gosden, C. 1994. Social Being and Time. Oxford: Blackwell. Gosselain, O. P. 1998. Social and technical identity in a clay crystal ball. In M. T. Stark, The Archaeology of Social Boundaries. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution Press, 7106. Hernando, A. 2000. Hombres del tiempo y mujeres del espacio: Individualidad, poder y relaciones de gnero, Arqueologa Espacial 22:2344. . 2002. Arqueologa de la Identidad. Madrid: Akal. Hodder, I. 1990. Style as historical quality. In M. Conkey and C. Hastorf (eds.), The Uses of Style in Archaeology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 4451. Jones, S. 1997. The Archaeology of Ethnicity: Constructing Identities in the Past and the Present. London: Routledge. Keyser, J. D. 2001. Relative dating methods. In D. S. Whitley (ed.), Handbook of Rock Art Research. Lanham, MD: AltaMira Press, 11638. Layton, R. 1991. The Anthropology of Art. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Lechtman, H. 1977. Style in technology: Some early thoughts. In H. Lechtman and R. S. Merrill (eds.), Material Culture: Styles, Organization and Dynamics of Technology. Saint Paul, MN: West Publications, 320. Leroi-Gourhan, A. 1964. Treasures of Prehistoric Art [English edition]. New York: H. N. Abrams. Lorblanchet, M., and P. G. Bahn. 1993. Rock Art Studies: The Post-Stylistic Era or, Where Do We Go from Here? Oxford: Oxbow Monograph, 35. Macdonald, W. 1990. Investigating style: An exploratory analysis of some Plains burials. In M. Conkey and C. Hastorf (eds.), The Uses of Style in Archaeology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 5260. Martnez, J. 2000. La pintura rupestre esquemtica como a estrategia simblica docupaci territorial, Cota Zero 16:3546. Nash, G., and C. Chippindale (eds.). 2001. European Landscapes of Rock-Art. London: Routledge. Pettitt, P., and P. Bahn. 2003. Current problems in dating Palaeolithic cave art: Candamo and Chauvet, Antiquity 77(295):13441.

DOMINGO_CH_01.indd 27

2/27/2008 3:06:56 PM

MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED OR SOLD

28

Chapter 1

Ridley, B. K. 1994. Time, Space and Things. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Rosenfeld, A., and C. Smith. 1997. Recent developments in radiocarbon and stylistic methods of dating rock-art, Antiquity 71:40511. Ross, M. 2001. Emerging trends in rock-art research: Hunter-gatherer culture, land and landscape, Antiquity 75:54348. Rowe, M. V. 2001. Dating by AMS Radiocarbon Analysis. In D. S. Whitley (ed.), Handbook of Rock Art Research. Lanham, MD: AltaMira Press, 13966. Rowlands, M. 1993. The role of memory in the transmission of culture, World Archaeology 25(2):14151. Sackett, J. R. 1977. The meaning of style in archaeology: A general model, American Antiquity 42(3):36980. . 1982. Approaches to style in lithic archaeology, Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 1:59112. . 1990. Style and ethnicity in archaeology: The case for isochrestism. In M. Conkey and C. Hastorf (eds.), The Uses of Style in Archaeology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 3243. Schapiro, M. 1953. Style. In A. L. Kroeber, Anthropology Today: An Encyclopedic Inventory. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 287312. Schobinger, H., and C. Gradin. 1985. Cazadores de la Patagonia y agricultores Andinos. Arte rupestre argentino. Madrid: Encuentro. Shanks, M., and C. Tilley. 1987. Re-constructing Archaeology: Theory and Practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Shennan, S. 1989. Introduction: Archaeological approaches to cultural identity. In S. Shennan (ed.), Introduction: Archaeological Approaches to Cultural Identity. London: Routledge, 132. Smith, C. 1996. Situating style: An ethnoarchaeological study of social and material context in an Australian Aboriginal artistic system. Unpublished PhD Thesis, University of New England. Steelman, K. L., F. Carrera, R. Fbregas, T. Guilderson, and M. W. Rowe. 2005. Direct radiocarbon dating of megalithic paints from northwest Iberia, Antiquity 79:37989. Strathern, A., and M. Strathern. 1971. Self-Decoration in Mount Hagen. London: Duckworth. Tilley, C. 1994. The Phenomenology of Landscape. Oxford: Berg Press. Ucko, P., and R. Layton (eds.). 1999. The Archaeology and the Anthropology of Landscape: Shaping Your Landscape. London: Routledge. Ucko, P., and A. Rosenfeld. 1967. Palaeolithic Cave Art. London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson. Valladas, H., and J. Clottes. 2003. Style, Chauvet and radiocarbon, Antiquity 77(295):14245. Villaverde, V. 1994. Arte Paleoltico de la Cova del Parpall. Estudio de la coleccin de plaquetas y cantos grabados y pintados. II vols. Valncia: S.I.P. de la Diputaci de Valncia. Wiessner, P. 1983. Style and social information in Kalahari San projectile points, American Antiquity 48:25376. . 1990. Is there a unit of style?. In M. Conkey and C. Hastorf (eds.), The Uses of Style in Archaeology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 10512. Wobst, M. 1977. Stylistic behaviour and information exchange. In C. E. Cleland (ed.), For the Director: Research Essays in Honor of James B. Grifn. University of Michigan, Museum of Anthropology Anthropological Papers, 61:31742. . 1999. Style in archaeology or archaeologists in style. In E. S. Chilton (ed.), Material Meaning: Critical Approaches to the Interpretation of Material Culture, Foundations of Archaeological Inquiri, 11832.

DOMINGO_CH_01.indd 28

2/27/2008 3:06:56 PM