Joanna Bruck | University of Bristol (original) (raw)
Papers by Joanna Bruck
Oxford journal of archaeology, 2000
... OXFORD JOURNAL OF ARCHAEOLOGY ß Blackwell Publishers Ltd ... activities of people camped for ... more ... OXFORD JOURNAL OF ARCHAEOLOGY ß Blackwell Publishers Ltd ... activities of people camped for a while at a site for the duration of a festival or burial. As outlined above, one popular current model for Early Bronze Age settlement envisages small scale, co-residential groups ...
Antiquity
Abstract Recent critiques of ancient DNA (aDNA) studies in archaeology have called into question ... more Abstract Recent critiques of ancient DNA (aDNA) studies in archaeology have called into question the problematic conflation of genetics with ethnic, cultural and racial identity. As yet, however, there has been little discussion of the increasing use of aDNA to reconstruct prehistoric kinship systems. This article draws on anthropological research to argue that kinship relations are not determined by biogenetic links, but are generated through social practice. A variety of archaeological evidence can be employed to explore how enduring affective relationships are created with both human and non-human others. These points require us to challenge androcentric and heteronormative interpretations of aDNA data in the Bronze Age and more widely.
… Compositions: Papers from a Session Held …, 2001
Page 69. CHAPTER FOUR What's in a settlement? Domestic practice and residential mobility in ... more Page 69. CHAPTER FOUR What's in a settlement? Domestic practice and residential mobility in Early Bronze Age southern England Joanna Brück Introduction The Early Bronze Age of southern England1 is one of the most intensively researched areas in British archaeology. ...
European Journal of Archaeology, Jul 18, 2013
This paper argues that the conception of ritual employed in both archaeology and anthropology is ... more This paper argues that the conception of ritual employed in both archaeology and anthropology is a product of post-Enlightenment rationalism. Because it does not meet modern western criteria for practical action, ritual is frequently described as non-functional and irrational; furthermore, this designation is employed as the primary way of identifying ritual archaeologically. However, this evaluation of ritual action must be questioned. Contemporary modes of categorizing human practice are not untainted by socio-political interest but enable the reproduction of certain forms of power. It is argued that many other societies do not distinguish ritual from secular action. In fact, what anthropologists identify as ritual is generally considered practical and effective action by its practitioners. This is because different conceptions of instrumentality and causation inform such activities. For archaeologists, use of the concept of ritual has resulted in a serious misapprehension of prehistoric rationality such that ‘secular’ activities (for example subsistence practices) are assumed to be governed by a universally-applicable functionalist logic. In order to address this problem, what is required is an approach that explores the essential difference between prehistoric rationality and our own notions of what is effective action. A discussion of some finds from middle Bronze Age settlements in southern England will provide a working example of how one might begin to move towards this goal.
Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society, 1999
This paper explores how the lifecycles of Middle Bronze Age settlements were intimately related a... more This paper explores how the lifecycles of Middle Bronze Age settlements were intimately related at both a practical and metaphorical level to the lifecycles of their inhabitants. Many settlements of this date appear to have been single-generational sites. Building sequences and other changes in the use of settlement space can be understood within a framework that explores how the demographic, social, and economic circumstances of a site's occupants changed over time. However, the lifecycle of the settlement was not only related to that of its occupants in practical terms; each was also a symbolic representation of the other. For example, such acts as the deposition of whole quernstones or animal burials in pits and ditches may have been carried out at critical points in the lifecycle of a settlement, its structures, and its inhabitants. The notion that settlements had lifecycles introduces the possibility of anthropomorphic symbolism in house architecture, a suggestion that may help to explain the presence of a standardised house form during the Middle Bronze Age. Yet, despite the formality of the architecture, there was considerable diversity in how space was actually used within the round-house. Likewise, variability in other aspects of these settlement sites suggests that, although cultural ideals may have existed, in practice the developmental cycle of each household group depended on a particular set of social and material circumstances as well as on household members' commitment to communal tradition.
Archaeological Review from Cambridge, 1998
Oxford journal of archaeology, 2000
... OXFORD JOURNAL OF ARCHAEOLOGY ß Blackwell Publishers Ltd ... activities of people camped for ... more ... OXFORD JOURNAL OF ARCHAEOLOGY ß Blackwell Publishers Ltd ... activities of people camped for a while at a site for the duration of a festival or burial. As outlined above, one popular current model for Early Bronze Age settlement envisages small scale, co-residential groups ...
Antiquity
Abstract Recent critiques of ancient DNA (aDNA) studies in archaeology have called into question ... more Abstract Recent critiques of ancient DNA (aDNA) studies in archaeology have called into question the problematic conflation of genetics with ethnic, cultural and racial identity. As yet, however, there has been little discussion of the increasing use of aDNA to reconstruct prehistoric kinship systems. This article draws on anthropological research to argue that kinship relations are not determined by biogenetic links, but are generated through social practice. A variety of archaeological evidence can be employed to explore how enduring affective relationships are created with both human and non-human others. These points require us to challenge androcentric and heteronormative interpretations of aDNA data in the Bronze Age and more widely.
… Compositions: Papers from a Session Held …, 2001
Page 69. CHAPTER FOUR What's in a settlement? Domestic practice and residential mobility in ... more Page 69. CHAPTER FOUR What's in a settlement? Domestic practice and residential mobility in Early Bronze Age southern England Joanna Brück Introduction The Early Bronze Age of southern England1 is one of the most intensively researched areas in British archaeology. ...
European Journal of Archaeology, Jul 18, 2013
This paper argues that the conception of ritual employed in both archaeology and anthropology is ... more This paper argues that the conception of ritual employed in both archaeology and anthropology is a product of post-Enlightenment rationalism. Because it does not meet modern western criteria for practical action, ritual is frequently described as non-functional and irrational; furthermore, this designation is employed as the primary way of identifying ritual archaeologically. However, this evaluation of ritual action must be questioned. Contemporary modes of categorizing human practice are not untainted by socio-political interest but enable the reproduction of certain forms of power. It is argued that many other societies do not distinguish ritual from secular action. In fact, what anthropologists identify as ritual is generally considered practical and effective action by its practitioners. This is because different conceptions of instrumentality and causation inform such activities. For archaeologists, use of the concept of ritual has resulted in a serious misapprehension of prehistoric rationality such that ‘secular’ activities (for example subsistence practices) are assumed to be governed by a universally-applicable functionalist logic. In order to address this problem, what is required is an approach that explores the essential difference between prehistoric rationality and our own notions of what is effective action. A discussion of some finds from middle Bronze Age settlements in southern England will provide a working example of how one might begin to move towards this goal.
Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society, 1999
This paper explores how the lifecycles of Middle Bronze Age settlements were intimately related a... more This paper explores how the lifecycles of Middle Bronze Age settlements were intimately related at both a practical and metaphorical level to the lifecycles of their inhabitants. Many settlements of this date appear to have been single-generational sites. Building sequences and other changes in the use of settlement space can be understood within a framework that explores how the demographic, social, and economic circumstances of a site's occupants changed over time. However, the lifecycle of the settlement was not only related to that of its occupants in practical terms; each was also a symbolic representation of the other. For example, such acts as the deposition of whole quernstones or animal burials in pits and ditches may have been carried out at critical points in the lifecycle of a settlement, its structures, and its inhabitants. The notion that settlements had lifecycles introduces the possibility of anthropomorphic symbolism in house architecture, a suggestion that may help to explain the presence of a standardised house form during the Middle Bronze Age. Yet, despite the formality of the architecture, there was considerable diversity in how space was actually used within the round-house. Likewise, variability in other aspects of these settlement sites suggests that, although cultural ideals may have existed, in practice the developmental cycle of each household group depended on a particular set of social and material circumstances as well as on household members' commitment to communal tradition.
Archaeological Review from Cambridge, 1998