scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Book

The Archaeology of Ethnicity: Constructing Identities in the Past and Present

01 Jan 1997-
TL;DR: Sian Jones as mentioned in this paper argues for a fundamentally different view of ethnicity, as a complex dynamic form of identification, requiring radical changes in archaeological analysis and interpretation, and presents a comprehensive and critical synthesis of recent theories of ethnicity in the human sciences.
Abstract: The question of ethnicity is highly controversial in contemporary archaeology. Indigenous and nationalist claims to territory, often rely on reconstructions of the past based on the traditional identification of 'cultures' from archaeological remains. Sian Jones responds to the need for a reassessment of the ways in which social groups are identified in the archaeological record, with a comprehensive and critical synthesis of recent theories of ethnicity in the human sciences. In doing so, she argues for a fundamentally different view of ethnicity, as a complex dynamic form of identification, requiring radical changes in archaeological analysis and interpretation.
Citations
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors define the "Tierra Santa" and "tierra prometida" of the sionismo and define a "hogar nacional" judio of the Sionismo.
Abstract: Resumen es: La “Tierra Santa” del cristianismo y la “Tierra Prometida” del judaismo y luego, en un sentido secular, el “hogar nacional” judio del sionismo, constituy...

3 citations

DOI
11 Jul 2014
TL;DR: In this article, the authors present an analysis of the Habitus-Konzept of Pierre Bourdieu in the context of sozialgeschichtlicher Analysen in Archaologie.
Abstract: Das Hauptinteresse sozialgeschichtlicher Analysen in der Archaologie gilt der Identifikation sozialer Gruppen und Schichten, wobei eindeutig die Eliten im Mittelpunkt stehen. In jungerer Zeit wurde vermehrt nach Identitat und Distinktion gefragt, fur die letztlich das Habitus-Konzept von Pierre Bourdieu wesentlich ist. Zugleich bietet das Habitus-Konzept aber auch eine interessante Perspektive fur das Problem des Umweltdeterminismus. Vorliegender Artikel versucht einen Uberblick zu geben, wie Archaologen bislang auf das Habitus-Konzept eingegangen sind. Berucksichtigt werden die Klassische und die Provinzialromische Archaologie, die Prahistorische und die Historische Archaologie. Es wird deutlich, dass der Habitus ein Hintergrundkonzept bietet, das bei der Formulierung von Fragestellungen – und der Uberwindung einfacher hierarchischer Gesellschaftsmodelle – hilft, aber nicht uber eine explizite Methodik verfugt oder ein allgemeingultiges Interpretationsschema fur eine Sozialarchaologie liefert.

3 citations

01 Jan 2013
TL;DR: In this article, the authors investigate material culture from the Southern Levant during the Iron I Period to see if it truly does represent the ethnicities of "Canaanite" and "Israelite", and if these ethnic labels are correctly attributed to the material culture.
Abstract: In the recent decades, the study of the archaeology of ethnicity has become increasingly important throughout the field of archaeology. Many books and articles have been written which address the questions of what is ethnicity, what is an ethnic group, and can we see ethnicity in material culture? Questions pertaining to ethnicity have been of great importance in the archaeology of the Southern Levant as scholars have debated over the ethnic identity and labels of such groups as the Canaanites and Israelites. There is a great debate over the difference between “Canaanite” and “Israelite” material culture, and if these ethnicities can even be seen in the archaeological record. The purpose of this research is to investigate material culture from the Southern Levant during the Iron I Period to see if it truly does represent the ethnicities of “Canaanite” and “Israelite” and if these ethnic labels are correctly attributed to the material culture. I will address two main questions in this research which are: Does material culture represent ethnicity, and should archaeologists apply ethnic labels to material culture? My attempt at answer these questions will be divided into five chapters. In the first chapter, I will present a brief of the history of archaeological investigation in the Southern Levant with it bases in Biblical studies. The second chapter will focus on examining the past and current theories of ethnicity and how these affect our understanding of ethnicity in the archaeological record as well as shaping our current paradigms. Chapter three will be an examination of the specific theories regarding the Canaanite and Israelite identities and how scholars have identified them in the past in the archaeological record and in historical texts. In chapter four, I will present material culture from Iron I strata of two case studies, Beth Shean and Hazor, which have been given by scholars the ethnic labels of Canaanite and Israelite respectively. The focus will be upon certain architectural elements and the ceramic assemblage. Finally, in the fifth chapter, I will critically examine the material culture from Beth Shean and Hazor in light of the theoretical framework established in the prior chapters to determine if the material culture truly can be called ethnically “Canaanite” or Israelite. In this process, I will attempt to answer my two research questions. Thus, the purpose of this research is to critically examine the ethnic labels which have been given to the material culture from the Southern Levant during the Iron I Period.

2 citations

Journal Article
TL;DR: The role of contemporary sociological theories about nations and nationalisms in understanding the collective identity in archaeology has been discussed in this paper, where two outstanding representatives among the theoreticians (Ernest Gellner and Anthony David Smith) are discussed.
Abstract: The article deals with the role of contemporary sociological theories about nations and nationalisms, specifically two outstanding representatives among the theoreticians - Ernest Gellner and Anthony David Smith - and their role in understanding the collective identity in archaeology, calling attention to inconsistencies tied to the poor knowledge of sociological theories about nationalism, and indicating a new path to comprehending ethnicity, which was introduced into archaeology by Sian Jones.

2 citations