Archaeologies of art: Time, place, and identity in rock art, portable art, and body art

Archaeologies of Art: Time, Place, and Identity

Volumn , Issue , 2016, Pages 15-28

  Sanz, Inés Domingo ^a   Fiore, Dánae ^b   May, Sally K ^c  

^a FLINDERS UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

^b Facultad de Ciencias Naturales e Instituto M Lillo   (Argentina)

^c GRIFFITH UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85106504511     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.4324/9781315434339-8     Document Type: Chapter

References (62)

1. Anati, E. 2002. Lo stile come fatoore diagnostico nell’arte preistorica. Italia: Centro Camuno di Studi Preistorici, 112 pp.
2. Bailey, G. 1983. ‘Concepts of time in quaternary prehistory’, Annual Review of Anthropology 12:165-92.
3. Barth, F. 1969. Ethnic Groups and Boundaries. London: Unwin.
4. Binford, L. R. 1965. ‘Archaeological systematics and the study of cultural process’. Reprinted in L. R. Binford, An Archaeological Perspective. New York: Academic Press, 195-207.
5. Bonfil, G. 1972. ‘El concepto de indio en América: una categoría de la situación colonial’, Anales de Antropología 9:105-21.
6. Bradley, R. 2000. The Significance of Natural Places. London: Routledge.
7. Burke, H., and C. Smith. 2004. The Archaeologist’s Field Handbook. New South Wales: Allen and Unwin.
8. Carr, C., and J. E. Neitzel (ed.). 1995. Style, Society and Person. Archaeological and Ethnological Perspectives. London: Plenum Press.
9. Chaloupka, G. 1993. Journey in Time: The World’s Longest Continuing Art Tradition. Sydney: Reed.
10. Conkey, M. 2006. ‘Style, design and function’. In Ch. Tilley, W. Keane, S. Kuechler-Fogden, M. Rowlands, and P. Spyer (eds.), The Handbook of Material Culture. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 355-72.
11. Conkey, M., and C. Hastorf (eds.). 1990. The Uses of Style in Archaeology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 124 pp.
12. Diaz, H. 1981. ‘Etnia, clase y cuestión nacional’, Revista mexicana de ciencias políticas y sociales XXVII(103):101-20.
13. Diaz, H. 1984. ‘Notas teórico-metodológicas para el estudio de la cuestión étnica’, Boletín de Antropología Americana 10:45-52.
14. 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 Societé: La Ceramique, Document Technique, Economique, Cultural. XIV Reconcontres Internationales d’Archéologie et d’Histoire d’Antibes. Juan-les Pins. Ediciones APDCA.
15. Dobres, M. A. 2000. Technology and Social Agency: Outlining a Practice Framework for Archaeology. Oxford: Blackwell Publisher.
16. Domingo Sanz, I. 2005. Técnica y ejecución de la figura en el Arte Rupestre Levantino. Hacia una definición actualizada del concepto de estilo: Validez y limitaciones. Valencia: Servei de Publicacions de la Universitat de Valencia, 457 pp. (CD).
17. Engelmark, R., and T. B. Larsson. 2005. ‘Rock art and environment: Toward increased contextual understanding’. In M. Santos and A. Troncoso, Reflexiones sobre Arte Rupestre: paisaje, forma y contenido. Tapa 33. Santiago de Compostela: Instituto de Estudios Galegos Padre Sarmiento, 113-22.
18. Faris, J. 1972. Nuba Personal Art. London: Duckworth.
19. Fiore, D. 1996. ‘El arte rupestre como producto complejo de procesos económicos e ideológicos: Una propuesta de análisis’, Espacio, Tiempo y Forma. Serie I. Prehistoria y Arqueología 9:239-59.
20. Fiore, D. 2006. ‘Poblamiento de imágenes: Arte rupestre y colonización de la Patagonia. Variabilidad y ritmos de cambio en tiempo y espacio’. In D. Fiore and M. Podestá (eds.), Tramas en la Piedra. Producción y usos del arte rupestre. Buenos Aires: INAPL and WAC - World Archaeological Congress, 43-61.
21. Fortea, F. J. 2002. ‘Trente-neuf dates C14-SMA pour l’art pariétal paleolithique des Asturies’, Bulletin de la Société Préhistorique Ariége-Pyrénées LVII:7-28.
22. Garcia Canclini, N. 1986. La Produccion Simbolica. Teoria y Metodo en Sociologia del Arte. México: Siglo XXI.
23. González, A. R. 1977. Arte precolombino de la Argentina. Buenos Aires: Filmediciones Valero.
24. Gosden, C. 1994. Social Being and Time. Oxford: Blackwell.
25. 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.
26. Hernando, A. 2000. ‘Hombres del tiempo y mujeres del espacio: Individualidad, poder y relaciones de géneró', Arqueología Espacial 22:23-44.
27. Hernando, A. 2002. Arqueología de la Identidad. Madrid: Akal.
28. Hodder, I. 1990. ‘Style as historical quality’. In M. Conkey and C. Hastorf (eds.), The Uses of Style in Archaeology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 44-51.
29. Jones, S. 1997. The Archaeology of Ethnicity: Constructing Identities in the Past and the Present. London: Routledge.
30. Keyser, J. D. 2001. ‘Relative dating methods’. In D. S. Whitley (ed.), Handbook of Rock Art Research. Lanham, MD: AltaMira Press, 116-38.
31. Layton, R. 1991. The Anthropology of Art. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
32. 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, 3-20.
33. Leroi-Gourhan, A. 1964. Treasures of Prehistoric Art [English edition]. New York: H. N. Abrams.
34. 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.
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, 52-60.
36. Martínez, J. 2000. ‘La pintura rupestre esquemática como a estrategia simbólica d’ocupació territorial’, Cota Zero 16:35-46.
37. Nash, G., and C. Chippindale (eds.). 2001. European Landscapes of Rock-Art. London: Routledge.
38. Pettitt, P., and P. Bahn. 2003. ‘Current problems in dating Palaeolithic cave art: Candamo and Chauvet’, Antiquity 77(295):134-41.
39. Ridley, B. K. 1994. Time, Space and Things. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
40. Rosenfeld, A., and C. Smith. 1997. ‘Recent developments in radiocarbon and stylistic methods of dating rock-art’, Antiquity 71:405-11.
41. Ross, M. 2001. ‘Emerging trends in rock-art research: Hunter-gatherer culture, land and landscape’, Antiquity 75:543-48.
42. Rowe, M. V. 2001. ‘Dating by AMS Radiocarbon Analysis’. In D. S. Whitley (ed.), Handbook of Rock Art Research. Lanham, MD: AltaMira Press, 139-66.
43. Rowlands, M. 1993. ‘The role of memory in the transmission of culture’, World Archaeology 25(2):141-51.
44. Sackett, J. R. 1977. ‘The meaning of style in archaeology: A general model’, American Antiquity 42(3):369-80.
45. Sackett, J. R. 1982. ‘Approaches to style in lithic archaeology’, Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 1:59-112.
46. Sackett, J. R. 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, 32-43.
47. Schapiro, M. 1953. ‘Style’. In A. L. Kroeber, Anthropology Today: An Encyclopedic Inventory. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 287-312.
48. Schobinger, H., and C. Gradin. 1985. Cazadores de la Patagonia y agricultores Andinos. Arte rupestre argentino. Madrid: Encuentro.
49. Shanks, M., and C. Tilley. 1987. Re-constructing Archaeology: Theory and Practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
50. Shennan, S. 1989. ‘Introduction: Archaeological approaches to cultural identity’. In S. Shennan (ed.), Introduction: Archaeological Approaches to Cultural Identity. London: Routledge, 1-32.
51. 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.
52. Steelman, K. L., F. Carrera, R. Fábregas, T. Guilderson, and M. W. Rowe. 2005. ‘Direct radiocarbon dating of megalithic paints from northwest Iberia’, Antiquity 79:379-89.
53. Strathern, A., and M. Strathern. 1971. Self-Decoration in Mount Hagen. London: Duckworth.
54. Tilley, C. 1994. The Phenomenology of Landscape. Oxford: Berg Press.
55. Ucko, P., and R. Layton (eds.). 1999. The Archaeology and the Anthropology of Landscape: Shaping Your Landscape. London: Routledge.
56. Ucko, P., and A. Rosenfeld. 1967. Palaeolithic Cave Art. London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson.
57. Valladas, H., and J. Clottes. 2003. ‘Style, Chauvet and radiocarbon’, Antiquity 77(295):142-45.
58. Villaverde, V. 1994. Arte Paleolítico de la Cova del Parpalló. Estudio de la colección de plaquetas y cantos grabados y pintados. II vols. Valéncia: S.I.P. de la Diputació de Valéncia.
59. Wiessner, P. 1983. ‘Style and social information in Kalahari San projectile points’, American Antiquity 48:253-76.
60. Wiessner, P. 1990. ‘Is there a unit of style?'. In M. Conkey and C. Hastorf (eds.), The Uses of Style in Archaeology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 105-12.
61. Wobst, M. 1977. ‘Stylistic behaviour and information exchange’. In C. E. Cleland (ed.), For the Director: Research Essays in Honor of James B. Griffin. University of Michigan, Museum of Anthropology Anthropological Papers, 61:317-42.
62. Wobst, M. 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, 118-32.