Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-2n9c9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-15T13:31:34.530Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Figurine enigmas: who's to know?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 November 2010

N. James and
Juliet Chippindale
N. James
Affiliation:
Department of Archaeology, University of Cambridge, Downing Street, Cambridge, CB2 3DZ, UK (Author for correspondence)
Juliet Chippindale
Affiliation:
c/o Department of Archaeology, University of Cambridge, Downing Street, Cambridge, CB2 3DZ, UK (Email: juliet.chippindale@gmail.com)
Get accessRights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Should a public archaeology exhibition focus on objects as objects, or should it also explain something of where they come from and processes of interpreting them? If background is necessary, then how much is needed to make sense of the exhibits? Two recent exhibitions offered different answers. The first was largely descriptive, the second theoretical, and specifically, ‘post-processualist’. Both featured prehistoric anthropomorphic figurines of fired clay. Whether or not because ‘themore human, the less intelligible’ (Hawkes 1954: 162), figurines are among the most intriguing and enigmatic finds. What were they for, and what did they mean? Why do they captivate us today; and how should archaeologists cater for that interest?

Information

Type
Debate
Information
Antiquity , Volume 84 , Issue 326 , December 2010, pp. 1172 - 1176
Copyright
Copyright © Antiquity Publications Ltd 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Bailey, D.W. 2005. Prehistoric figurines: representation and corporeality in the Neolithic. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
Bailey, D. 2009. The Chobonaino dogu: understanding a Late Jomon figure from Hakodate, in Kaner, S. (ed.) The power of dogu: ceramic figures from ancient Japan: 60–9. London: British Museum Press.Google Scholar
Bailey, D., Cochrane, A. & Zambelli, J.. 2010. Unearthed: a comparative study of Jōmon dogū and Neolithic figurines. n.p.: Sainsbury Institute for the Study of Japanese Arts & Culture.Google Scholar
Bender, B., Hamilton, S. & Tilley, C.. 1997. Leskernick: stone worlds; alternative narratives; nested landscapes. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 63: 147–78.Google Scholar
Carman, J. 2002. Archaeology and heritage: an introduction. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
Cochrane, A. & Russell, I.. 2007. Visualizing archaeologies: a manifesto. Cambridge Archaeological Journal 17: 3–19.Google Scholar
Hawkes, C. 1954. Archaeological theory and method: some suggestions from the Old World. American Anthropologist 56: 155–68.Google Scholar
Hodder, I. 1984. Postprocessual archaeology. Advances in Archaeological Theory and Method 8: 1–26.Google Scholar
Holtorf, C. 2010. Heritage values in contemporary popular culture, in Smith, G.S., Messenger, P.M. & Soderland, H.A. (ed.) Heritage values in contemporary society, 43–54. Walnut Creek (CA): Left Coast.Google Scholar
Jameson, F. 1984. Postmodernism, or the cultural logic of late capitalism. New Left Review 146: 53–92.Google Scholar
Kaner, S. 2009a. Encountering dogu, in Kaner, S. (ed.) The power of dogu: ceramic figures from ancient Japan: 24–39. London: British Museum Press.Google Scholar
Kaner, S. (ed.) 2009b. The power of dogu: ceramic figures from ancient Japan. London: British Museum Press.Google Scholar
Potter, P.B. Jr. & Leone, M.P.. 1987. Archaeology in public in Annapolis: four seasons, six sites, seven tours, and 32 000 visitors. American Archaeology 6: 51–61.Google Scholar
Rousmaniere, N.C. 2009. Rediscovering dogu in modern Japan, in Kaner, S. (ed.) The power of dogu: ceramic figures from ancient Japan: 70–83. London: British Museum Press.Google Scholar
Shanks, M. & Hodder, I.. 1995. Processual, postprocessual and interpretive archaeologies, in Hodder, I., Shanks, M., Alexandri, A., Buchli, V., Carman, J., Last, J. & Lucas, G. (ed.) Interpreting archaeology: finding meaning in the past: 3–29London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Shanks, M. & Tilley, C.. 1987. Social theory and archaeology. Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
Shanks, M. & Tilley, C.. 1992. Re-constructing archaeology: theory and practice. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Shiga. 2010. Japan's oldest clay figure in Higashi-Omi. Available at: http://shiga-ken.com/blog/2010/06/japans-oldest-clay-figure-in-higashi-omi/ (accessed 16 September 2010).Google Scholar
Unearthed Team. 2010. Unearthed. Norwich: Sainsbury Centre for Visual Arts.Google Scholar