Chamberlin, M. A. (2006). Symbolic conflict and the spatiality of tradition in small-scale societies. Cambridge Archaeol J 16 (1). Vol 16(1), pp. 39-51.
Title The title of the publication or report |
Symbolic conflict and the spatiality of tradition in small-scale societies | ||
---|---|---|---|
Issue The name of the volume or issue |
Cambridge Archaeol J 16 (1) | ||
Series The series the publication or report is included in |
Cambridge Archaeological Journal | ||
Volume Volume number and part |
16 (1) | ||
Page Start/End The start and end page numbers. |
39 - 51 | ||
Biblio Note This is a Bibliographic record only. |
The ADS have no files for download on this page but further information is available online, normally as an electronic version maintained by the Publisher, or held in a larger collection such as an ADS Archive. Please refer to the DOI or URI listed in the Relations section of this record to locate the information you require. In the case of non-ADS resources, please be aware that we cannot advise further on availability. | ||
Publication Type The type of publication - report, monograph, journal article or chapter from a book |
Journal | ||
Abstract The abstract describing the content of the publication or report |
Archaeologists have explained the spatiality and spread of traditions primarily in terms of conflict-free transfers of knowledge. The article critiques the sociospatial conceptualization of tradition implicit in many of these explanations and re-theorizes tradition as a relational process of symbolic conflict. Of particular concern are hierarchical approaches to traditional knowledge that set the more durable unconscious or `embodied' elements of tradition apart from `symbolically invested practices' and attribute to each a unique spatiality, with that of embodied tradition involving largely benign mechanisms of transmission. The article proposes instead that the spatiality of tradition is the outcome of continuous reflexive transformation of embodied traditional knowledge in contested social and symbolic relationships between groups, and that this transformation unfolds in conflict over the meaning, ownership, and value of symbolic inventories (knowledge, names, practices, symbols) within social fields. Ethnographic and archaeological data are used to argue that strategies of symbolic conflict propel traditions along the relational pathways of fields. | ||
Year of Publication The year the book, article or report was published |
2006 | ||
Locations Any locations covered by the publication or report. This is not the place the book or report was published. |
|
||
Source Where the record has come from or which dataset it was orginally included in. |
BIAB
(The British & Irish Archaeological Bibliography (BIAB))
|
||
Relations Other resources which are relevant to this publication or report |
|
||
Created Date The date the record of the pubication was first entered |
03 Nov 2006 |