Identity “Matters”. Chasing Identity. Looking for coherence among a sense of the self, the group, the outsiders and a proper lifestyle in one’s microcosm and in areas of transition (original) (raw)
Related papers
2016
In each and every discourse on issues such as contact, evolution, transition, migration, integration and encounter, identity plays a central role. Being a manifold, uneasily describable object in itself, identity represents a very difficult object of study and many scholars from different disciplines of the human sciences (psychologists, anthropologists, sociologists, philosophers and linguists) have tried in recent years to give their contribution to the debate born around it. In the two meetings organized in Naples, April 14th 2015 and Turin, October 8-9th 2015 in the framework of the ATrA project, the issue has been discussed by archaeologists, linguists, philologists and anthropologists specifically adopting the perspective of observing and discussing identity through a reflection on its material manifestations in transitional contexts (be it in terms of language, of economical exchanges or of traditional handicraft). This book is a collection of selected papers from those meeti...
To identity and beyond: exploring the limits of the archaeological study of identity
2021
The concept of identity has been a focus for scholarly attention in archaeology for the last three decades. This thesis investigates the methodological problems and possibilities of the archaeological applicability of identity.By exploring the constraints on interpretation and the ways in which other disciplines, notably anthropology and social psychology, investigate the concept the epistemological boundary conditions within which archaeological interpretations of the past in terms of identity are made is sketched. Archaeology's engagement with 'identity' is assessed both quantitatively and qualitatively. A quantitative analysis of the occurrence of the term 'identity' in six journals covering the period 1990-2018 provides a (relatively course-grained) sense of the magnitude of the discipline's commitment of recourses to studying this subject. This quantitative analysis is complemented by a more in-depth, qualitative analysis of nine monographs dedicated to ...
Connecting linguistics and archaeology in the study of identity: A first exploration.
Sidestone Press, 2023
In this study, we discuss the ways in which linguistics and archaeology approach and investigate identity, focusing on potential areas of overlap between the two disciplines as a possible research program for future collaborative studies. Although the two disciplines may appear quite removed from one another at first sight, both deal with cultural items – whether material or linguistic – which are intrinsic to what it means to be human and which have an inherent function both as a means of communication and in their symbolic dimensions. Our ultimate goal here is to develop an interdisciplinary approach to identity as a specific field of human connectivity which can yield deeper insights into the topic than those achieved within the individual disciplines thus far and for which such a joint approach could be especially fruitful.
Identity Crisis: Archaeological Perspectives on Social Identity.
Identity Crisis As a component of daily practice, identity itself is a characteristic of both individuals and groups. The construction and maintenance of identity in the past may not have been straightforward; many of our social categories such as race, gender, and social status likely did not hold the same meaning to the people of the past (Meskell 2001; Wynne-Jones and Croucher 2007). Theorizing social identity in archaeology thus warrants recognition that, although our subjects are dead and long-buried, they were once people with lives, friends, goals and senses of self. We should, therefore, study past identities through the reconstruction of daily practices and social interactions to gain a greater understanding of the people of the past. Michel Foucault has argued that identity is a form of social construction which people impose on themselves and others (Foucault 1994). The contributions to this volume highlight the fact that there are, indeed, multiple, layered and plural identities, created through both self-definition and the perceptions of others. Consequently, the concepts and definitions of identity discussed in this volume are dynamic, changing with history, environment and socio-political relations (Martindale 2009; Wynne-Jones and Croucher 2007). For archaeologists who are forced to examine a static record, it is important to recognize the dynamic nature of social identity and to adopt a more active view of the archaeological record in which the construction of identity occurs as a fluid and continuous process (Meskell 2001). As archaeologists, we often operate under the assumption that artifacts and material remains have a direct relationship with social identity (Casella and Fowler 2005). Although material remains do serve as a good indication of social identity in many cases, this explicitly material focus is not necessarily justified. As the contributors to this volume show, the examination of material culture is only one of many ways in which social identity can be accessed in the archaeological record. Because identity is the product of social processes, the study of the daily lives of groups and individuals through material remains, iconography, communal events, dietary practices or burial customs can lead to a greater understanding of the mechanisms of identity construction and maintenance within a given culture (McGuire and Wurst 2002). As the contributions in this volume illustrate, the question of identity in archaeology is intriguing given the different approaches to identity construction and the different responses of individuals to social stimuli in past societies. The articles included in this volume explore the study of identity in a variety of contexts, ask different questions and offer new interpretations of the archaeological record. The Contributions The papers in this volume represent only a small subset of a wide range of papers from different regions and countries presented at the 2009 Chacmool Conference. The diverse array papers presented here should include something for everyone, from new approaches or ways of looking at identity in the archaeological record to new perspectives on social identity. Archaeologists in the Old and New Worlds are faced with different problems, materials and social contexts in their approaches to the study of identity. For organizational purposes, we have opted to present the papers dealing with the Old World first, followed by those dealing with New World culture areas, but we encourage our readers to explore the innovative approaches used in other parts of the world which may, in fact, have applicability in their own culture area. However, the volume begins with a paper by Andrew Gardner, the keynote speaker at the 2009 Conference, who presents a discussion of theoretical approaches and considerations in the archaeological study of identity. He discusses the fluid and multiple nature of social identity, which make it difficult to discover this ever-changing concept in the archaeological record. Identities, Gardner suggests, have the power to both divide and unite present and past populations. He nevertheless suggests that social identity can and should be studied archaeologically and presents a number of theoretical and methodological techniques for doing so. Gardner‘s encouragement to take up thestudy of social identity provides a nice lead into the remaining papers of the volume.
The Material Dialectic of Identity - Romanization Recast
This paper considers the question “what forms did ‘Romanization’ take, and what evidence do we have for this?” by arguing that Romanization makes the most sense as the study of the interactive process of identity formation for both Roman and Roman-subject peoples. The paper looks at both the forms and evidence of Romanization through the lens of recent scholarship on the concept. Romanization is treated here as an object-oriented (or material cultural) process wherein the various systems of objects in the archaeological record can be viewed as agents that not only bear witness to but also can be said to have stimulated a dialectical process of self-definition. By classifying the material evidence for Romanization into three structural categories—administrative, channel, and cultural—new analytical possibilities may be opened in terms of understanding identity in the Mediterranean region during the Classical Roman period.
Archaeology and Identity Paper that discusses theoretical aspects of identity and its use in Archaeology Archaeology and Identity: a brief overview of an old relationship: identity as an essence and a tool; crossing the desert; recovering in a context of paradigmatic transformation and plurality. Identity and Archaeology: a) What is Identity: the ontological problem and the epistemological consequences b) Identification processes: the “dichotomy” individual/collective; individual identity; group identity. c) Identification agents d) Conclusions
Archaeology of identity: introduction
The article raises problematic issues of ethnic interpretation of early medieval archaeological evidence from a historian's perspective, and discusses several aspects of identity and ethnicity in the period.
When attempting to isolate group identities (e.g. ethnic groups, nationalities, citizenry, tribe) often shared materials and practices are highlighted as the defining features of the collective. Archaeologically, however, this can be problematic. Ethnographers have observed that only a circumscribed set of materials or practices will have self-ascription significance for any given group. For prehistoric communities we have neither surviving group members nor extant written evidence to inform us about which materials or practices had such collective self-ascription significance. Group identity, however, can be expressed not only by materials, practices, and beliefs that are shared, but also in negative terms – by traits or associations that are either consciously avoided, or significantly adapted to seem traditional. Current globalisation studies have moved away from unidirectional assimilation analyses, to examine how outside influences are locally articulated by consuming communities. In Mediterranean prehistory, particularly during periods of conspicuous connectivity between different groups, a similar intentional rejection or adaptation may be read into local responses to cultural encounters. By looking at one instance – that of the Sicilian connection to the eastern Mediterranean during the Middle and Late Bronze Age – it will be argued that the rejection or severe re-contextualisation of certain outside materials and influences represents such an attempt to express and maintain a distinct collective identity in the face of increasing connectivity.