A Spanish resistance? Social archaeology and the study of Paleolithic art in Spain

Journal of Anthropological Research

Volumn 56, Issue 1, 2000, Pages 77-93

  Conkey, Margaret W ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0039838822     PISSN: 00917710     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1086/jar.56.1.3630969     Document Type: Article

References (81)

1. Allen, W.L., and J.B. Richardson III, 1971, The Reconstruction of Kinship from Archaeological Data: The Concepts, the Models and the Feasibility. American Antiquity 36:41-53.
2. Apellániz, J.M., 1992, Modèle d'un Analyse d'un Auteur de Représentations d'Animaux de Différentes Espèces: Le Tube de Torre (Pays Basque, Espagne). L'Anthropologie 96(2):453-72.
3. Apellániz, J.M., and F. Calvo Gómez, 1999, La Forma del Arte Paleolítico y la Estadística. Bilbao: Universidad de Duesto.
4. Bahn, P., 1982, Inter-Site and Inter-Regional Links during the Upper Palaeolithic: The Pyrenean Evidence. Oxford Journal of Archaeology 1(3):247-68.
5. Bahn, P.G., and J. Vertut, 1997, Journey through the Ice Age. Berkeley: University of California Press.
6. Balbín Behrmann, R., and J.J. Alcolea González, 1999, Vie Quotidienne et Vie Religieuse. Les Sanctuaires dans l'Art Paléolithique. L'Anthropologie 103(1):23-49.
7. Barandiarán, I., 1993, El Lobo Feroz: La Vacuidad de un Cuento Magdaleniense. Veleia 10:7-38.
8. Barandiarán, I., 1994, Arte Mueble del Paleolítico Cantábrico: Una Visión de Síntesis en 1994. Complutum 5:45-79.
9. Beltrán, A., 1989, Sobre el Arte Paleolítico: De Marcelino S. de Sautuola a la Crisis Actual de las Viejas Ideas. Pp. 131-56 in Cien Años Después de Sautuola (ed. by M. González Morales). Santander: Diputación Regional de Cantábria.
10. Binford, L., 1962, Archaeology as Anthropology. American Antiquity 28(2):217-25.
11. Binford, L., 1965, Archaeological Systematics and the Study of Culture Process. American Antiquity 31:203-10.
12. Bordes, F., J-P. Rigaud, and D. de Sonneville-Bordes, 1972, Des Buts, Problèmes, et Limites de l'Archéologie Paléolithique. Quaternaria 15:15-34.
13. Bourdieu, P., 1977, Outline of a Theory of Practice. Cambridge, Eng.: Cambridge University Press.
14. Breuil, H., 1952, Four Hundred Centuries of Cave Art (trans. by M. Boyle). Montignac, France: Centre d'Études et de Documentation Préhistoriques.
15. Clarke, D., 1968, Analytical Archaeology. London: Methuen.
16. Clarke, D., 1973, Archaeology: The Loss of Innocence. Antiquity 47(185):6-18.
17. Clottes, J., 1993, Theory and Record. In review feature, Material Culture and Text: The Art of Ambiguity. Cambridge Journal of Archaeology 31(1):121-23.
18. Clottes, J., 1995, Perspectives and Traditions in Paleolithic Rock Art Research in France. Pp. 35-64 in Perceiving Rock Art: Social and Political Perspectives (ed. by K. Helskog and B. Olsen). Oslo: Instittutet for Sammenlignende Kulturforskning.
19. Clottes, J., and J.D. Lewis-Williams, 1996, Les Chamanes de la Préhistoire: Transe et Magie dans les Grottes Ornées. Paris: Le Seuil.
20. Conkey, M., 1978a, Style and Information in Cultural Evolution: Toward a Predictive Model for the Palaeolithic. Pp. 61-85 in Social Archaeology: Beyond Subsistence and Dating (ed. by C. Redman, M.J. Berman, E. Curtin, W. Langhorne, Jr., N. Versaggi, and J. Wanser). New York: Academic Press.
21. Conkey, M., 1978b, An Analysis of Design Structure: Variability among Magdalenian Engraved Bones from Northcoastal Spain. Ph.D. diss., University of Chicago.
22. Conkey, M., 1980, The Identification of Prehistoric Hunter-Gatherer Aggregation Sites: The Case of Altamira. Current Anthropology 21(5):609-30.
23. Conkev, M., 1985, Ritual Communication, Social Elaboration, and the Variable Trajectories of Palaeolithic Material Culture. Pp. 299-323 in Prehistoric Hunter-Gatherers: The Emergence of Cultural Complexity (ed. by T.D. Price and J. Brown). New York: Academic Press.
24. Conkey, M., 1987, New Approaches in the Search for Meaning? A Review of Research in "Palaeolithic Art." Journal of Field Archaeology 14:413-30.
25. Conkey, M., 1989, The Structural Analysis of Paleolithic Art. Pp. 135-54 in Archaeological Thought in America (ed. by C.C. Lamberg-Karlovsky). Cambridge, Eng.: University of Cambridge Press.
26. Conkey, M., 1990, L'Art Mobilier et l'Établissement de Géographies Sociales. Pp. 163-72 in L'Art des Objets au Paléolithique, vol. 2: Les Voies de la Recherche. (Actes des Colloques de la Direction du Patrimoine, Foix-le Mas d'Azil, 1987). Paris: Ministre de la Culture.
27. Conkey, M., 1991, Contexts of Action, Contexts for Power: Material Culture and Gender in the Magdalenian. Pp. 57-92 in Engendering Archaeology: Women in Prehistory (ed. by J. Gero and M. Conkey). Oxford: Blackwell.
28. Conkey, M., 1992a, L'Approche Structurelle de l'Art Paléolithique et l'Héritage d'André Leroi-Gourhan. Les Nouvelles d'Archéologie 48-49:41-45.
29. Conkey, M., 1992b, Les Sites d'Agrégation et la Réparation de l'Art Mobilier, ou: Y-a-t-il des Sites d'Agrégation Magdalénien? Pp. 19-25 in Le Peuplement Magdalénien: Paléogeographie Physique et Humaine (ed. by J-P. Rigaud, H. Laville, and B. Vandermeersch). Éditions du Comité des Travaux Historiques et Scientifiques, Documents Préhistoriques 2: Actes du Colloque de Chancelade (October 1988). Paris: Comité des Travaux Historiques et Scientifiques.
30. Conkey, M., 2000, Structural and Semiotic Approaches. In Handbook ot Rock Art Research (ed. by D. Whitley). Walnut Creek, Calif.: Altamira Press. In press.
31. Coudart, A., 1999, Is Post-Processualism Bound to Happen Everywhere? The French Case. Antiquity 73(279):161-67.
32. Cronin, C., 1962, An Analysis of Pottery Design Elements, Indicating Possible Relationships between Three Decorated Types. Pp. 105-14 in Chapters in the Prehistory of Eastern Arizona, vol. 1 (ed. by P.S. Martin, J. Rinaldo, W. Longacre, C. Cronin, L.G. Freeman, and J. Schoenwetter). Fieldiana: Anthropology 53.
33. Culler, J., 1994, Introduction: What's the Point? Pp. 13-17 in The Point of Theory: Practices of Cultural Analysis (ed. by M. Bal and I.E. Boer). Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.
34. Deetz, J., 1965, The Dynamics of Stylistic Change in Arikara Ceramics. Illinois Studies in Anthropology 4. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.
35. Delporte, H., 1990, L'Image des Animaux dans l'Art Préhistorique. Paris: Picard.
36. Freeman, L.G., 1962, Statistical Analysis of Painted Pottery Types from the Upper Little Colorado Drainage. Pp. 87-104 in Chapters in the Prehistory of Eastern Arizona, vol. 1 (ed. by P.S. Martin, J. Rinaldo, W. Longacre, C. Cronin, L.G. Freeman, and J. Schoenwetter). Fieldiana: Anthropology 53.
37. Freeman, L.G., 1964, Mousterian Developments in Cantabrian Spain. Ph.D. diss., University of Chicago.
38. Freeman, L.G., 1994, Kaleidoscope or Tarnished Mirror? Thirty Years of Mousterian Research in Cantabria. Pp. 37-54 in Homenaje al Dr. Joaquín González Echegaray (ed. by J.A. Lasheras). Museo y Centro de Investigatión de Altamira, Monografías 17. Madrid.
39. Freeman, L.G., with J. González Echegaray, F. Bernaldo de Quirós, and J. Ogden, 1987, Altamira Revisited and Other Essays on Early Art. Institute for Prehistoric Investigations, Centro de Investigatión y Museo de Altamira. Santander.
40. Gamble, C., 1982, Interaction and Alliance in Palaeolithic Society. Man(ns)17(1):92-107.
41. Giddens, A., 1984, The Constitution of Society: Outline of a Theory of Structuration. Berkeley: University of California Press.
42. Gilman, A., 1984, Explaining the Upper Paleolithic Revolution. Pp. 115-26 in Marxist Perspectives in Archaeology (ed. by M. Spriggs). Cambridge, Eng.: Cambridge University Press.
43. González Morales, M., 1994, Pero . . . ¿Hubo Alguna Vez Once Mil Bisontes? Los Temas del Arte Parietal Paleolítico de le Región Cantábrica. Complutum 5:291-302.
44. González Morales, M., 1997, When the Beasts Go Marching Out! The End of Pleistocene Art in Cantabrian Spain. Pp. 189-200 in Beyond Art: Pleistocene Image and Symbol (ed. by M.W. Conkey, O. Soffer, D. Stratmann, and N. Jablonksi). San Francisco: California Academy of Sciences.
45. González Sainz, C., 1989a, El Magdaleniense Superior-Final de la Región Cantábrica. Santander: Departemento de Ciencias Históricas, Universidad de Cantábria.
46. González Sainz, C., 1989b, Algunas Reflexiones sobre el Hecho Artístico al Final del Paleolítico Superior. Pp. 229-62 in Cien Años Después Sautuola (ed. by M. González Morales). Santander: Diputacíon Regional de Cantábria.
47. González Sainz, C., 1993, En Torno a los Parelelos entre el Arte Mobiliar y el Rupestre. Veleia 10:39-56.
48. GRAPP (Groupe de Réflexions sur l'Art Pariétal Paléolithique), 1993, L'Art Pariétal Paléolithique: Techniques et Méthodes d'Étude. Paris: Comité des Travaux Historiques et Scientifiques.
49. Hill, J.N., 1970, Broken K Pueblo: Prehistoric Social Organization in the American Southwest. University of Arizona Anthropological Papers 18. Tucson: University of Arizona.
50. Hodder, I., 1982, Theoretical Archaeology: A Reactionary View. Pp. 1-16 in Symbolic and Structural Archaeology (ed. by I. Hodder). Cambridge, Eng.: Cambridge University Press.
51. Jochim, M., 1983, Palaeolithic Cave Art in Ecological Perspective. Pp. 212-19 in Hunter-Gatherer Economy in Prehistory: A European Perspective (ed. by G. Bailey). Cambridge, Eng.: Cambridge University Press.
52. Johnson, M., 1999, Archaeological Theory: An Introduction. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.
53. Klejn, L-S., 1980, Panorama de l'Archéologie Théorique. Pp. 163-303 in L'Archéologie Aujourd'hui (ed. by A. Schnapp). Paris: Hachette Littérature.
54. Laming-Emperaire, A., 1968, Système de Pensée et Organisation Sociale dans l'Art Rupestre Paléolithique. Pp. 197-212 in L'Homme de Cro-Magnon: Anthropologie et Archéologie (ed. by G. Camps and G. Oliver). Paris: Arts et Metièrs Graphiques.
55. Leroi-Gourhan, A., 1965, Treasures of Prehistoric Art. New York: Harry Abrams.
56. Leroi-Gourhan, A., 1968, The Evolution of Palaeolithic Art. Scientific American (February):58-74.
57. Leroi-Gourhan, A., 1986, The Religion of the Caves: Magic or Metaphysics (trans. by A. Michelson). October 37:5-17.
58. Lewis-Williams, J.D., 1994, Rock Art and Ritual: Southern Africa and Beyond. Complutum 5:277-89.
59. Lewis-Williams, J.D., 1997, Harnessing the Brain: Vision and Shamanism in Upper Paleolithic Western Europe. Pp. 321-42 in Beyond Art: Pleistocene Image and Symbol (ed. by M.W. Conkey, O. Soffer, D. Stratmann, and N. Jablonksi). San Francisco: California Academy of Sciences.
60. Longacre, W.A., 1970, Archaeology as Anthropology: A Case Study. University of Arizona Anthropological Papers 17. Tucson: University of Arizona.
61. Moure, A., 1994, Arte Paleolítico y Geografías Sociales, Asentamiento, Movilidad y Agregación en el Final del Paleolítico Cantábrico. Complutum 5:313:30.
62. Moure, A., 1995, Después de Altamira: Transformaciones en el Hecho Artístico al Final del Pleistoceno Pp. 225-58 in El Final del Paleolíico: Transformaciones Ambientales y Culturales durante el TardiGlacial y Comienzos del Holoceno en la Región Cantábrica (ed. by A. Moure and C. González Sainz). Santander: Universidad de Cantábria.
63. Moure, A., 1999, Arqueologí del Arte Prehistórico en la Península Ibérica. Madrid: Editorial Síntesis.
64. Plog, S., 1978, Social Interaction and Stylistic Similarity. Pp. 143-82 in Advances in Archaeological Method and Theory, vol. 1 (ed. by M.B. Schiffer). New York: Academic Press.
65. Preucel, R., 1995, The Post-Processual Condition. Journal of Archaeological Research 3(2):147-75.
66. Preucel, R., and I. Hodder, 1996, Contemporary Archaeology in Theory. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.
67. Redman, C., M.J. Berman, E.V. Curtin, J. William, T. Langhorne, Jr., N.M. Versaggi, and J.C. Wanser, 1978, Social Archaeology: Beyond Subsistence and Dating. New York: Academic Press.
68. Redman, C., E. Curtin, N. Versaggi, and J. Wanser, 1978, Social Archaeology: The Future of the Past. Pp. 1-18 in Social Archaeology: Beyond Subsistence and Dating (ed. by C. Redman, M.J. Berman, E.V. Curtin, J. William, T. Langhorne, Jr., N.M. Versaggi, and J.C. Wanser). New York: Academic Press.
69. Renfrew, C., and P. Bahn, 1996, Archaeology: Theories, Methods and Practice. London: Thames and Hudson.
70. Sauvet, G., and A. Wlodarczyk, 1995, Éléments d'une Grammaire Formelle de l'Art Pariétal Paléolithique. L'Anthropologie 99(2/3):193-211.
71. Sieveking, A., 1978, La Significaciön de las Distribuciones en el Arte Paleolítico. Trabajos de Prehistoria 35:61-80.
72. Sieveking, A., 1979, Style and Regional Grouping in Magdalenian Cave Art. Bulletin of the Institute of Archaeology 16:95-109.
73. Soffer, O., 1997, The Mutability of Upper Paleolithic Art in Central and Eastern Europe: Patterning and Significance. Pp. 239-61 in Beyond Art: Pleistocene Image and Symbol (ed. by M. Conkey, O. Soffer, D. Stratmann, and N. Jablonksi). San Francisco: California Academy of Sciences.
74. Stettler, H., 1999, Organic Artifacts from Cantabrian Spain. Paper presented at the Annual Meetings of the Society for American Archaeology, Chicago.
75. Trigger, B., 1984, Alternative Archaeologies: Nationalist, Colonialist, Imperialist. Man(ns)19:355-70.
76. Trigger, B., 1989, A History of Archaeological Thought. Cambridge, Eng.: Cambridge University Press.
77. Ucko, P., and A. Rosenfeld, 1967, Palaeolithic Cave Art. New York: McGraw-Hill.
78. Vaquero Turcios, J., 1995, Maestros Subterráneos: Las Técnicas del Arte Paleolítico. Madrid: Celeste.
79. Whallon, R., 1968, Investigations of Late Prehistoric Social Organization in New York State. Pp. 223-44 in New Perspectives in Archaeology (ed. by S.R. Binford and L.R. Binford). Chicago: Aldine.
80. Willey, G., and J. Sabloff, 1993, History of American Archaeology. New York: W.H. Freeman and Co.
81. Wylie, A., 1992, The Interplay of Evidential Constraints and Political Interests: Recent Archaeological Research on Gender. American Antiquity 57(1):15-35.