当前位置: X-MOL 学术Archaeological Dialogues › 论文详情
Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)
We run tingz, tingz nah run we
Archaeological Dialogues Pub Date : 2019-12-01 , DOI: 10.1017/s1380203819000175
Stuart Rathbone

best interest through skilful manipulation of social circumstances and material resources. But another answer is that in many cases they didn’t submit; aggrandizers were curtailed by overt and subversive resistance to their ends. This point brings to the forefront one issue not fully addressed by Borake – the relationship between the theory of anarchism and the concept of egalitarianism. They are not the same thing – anarchism, with its emphasis on autonomy and decentralization, staves off centralization at a political level and maintains autonomy at a local level, but it does not necessarily maintain egalitarianism in all social contexts. Coast Salish societies of the Pacific Northwest Coast of North America had significant inequalities, yet remained politically decentralized and maintained a high degree of autonomy in decision making (Grier 2017). In short, they traded off equality for autonomy. The empirical component of Borake’s study offers a fresh look at monumental constructions in Iron Age and medieval Scandinavia (monumental in the sense of Grier and Schwadron 2017). Most critical is the notion that we should see in many of the collective, expansive and iterative construction works she considers not the heavy hand of centralized power, but the product of decentralized collective action. How such enduring works can serve to reify decentralized politics and local autonomy has been quite underappreciated. Collective action in the service of autonomy might seem incongruous, but only from starting assumptions that preclude it (see Trigger 1990). We do get inklings of similar connections and practices from the archaeology of hunter-gatherer-fishers in the south-eastern US (e.g. Randall 2015; Wallis 2008), and similar to Borake’s study of Danevirke, there is a long arc to the construction process, often covering millennia, that reiterates, reinforces and at times remakes the social order over time. Similar ideas are also emerging from the Northwest Coast of North America (Grier, Angelbeck and McLay 2017). The archaeological question then becomes, how do we confidently recognize the products of anarchic organization in the archaeological record? Does a slow additive emergence and repeated investment in material thing sites directly imply networks, justified authority, autonomy and decentralization? That is Borake’s assertion in using the term ‘thing sites’ to describe such places – that the materiality and sociality of these places are embedded in a recursive and persistent relationship through time, reflecting expressions of anarchism principles. This is something we should be evaluating in archaeological contexts around the world. So I see strength in Borake’s application of anarchism as both a theoretical and an analytical framework. Ultimately this approach can provide a way to rethink aspects of the material record of collective action and its relation to a core set of principles that were undoubtedly operating in many social contexts in the past. In this sense, it offers a bottom-up theoretical perspective that can allow us to – in Borake’s words – ‘gain a more complex and nuanced understanding of how societies operate’ (p. 62; see also Furholt et al. 2019).

中文翻译:

我们运行tingz,tingz nah运行

通过巧妙地操纵社交环境和物质资源获得最大利益。但是另一个答案是,在许多情况下,他们没有提交。强化者由于对其目标的公开和颠覆性抵抗而受到限制。这一点凸显了Borake尚未完全解决的一个问题-无政府主义理论与平均主义概念之间的关系。它们不是一回事–无政府主义强调自治和权力下放,在政治层面上避免了中央集权,在地方层面上保持了自治,但不一定在所有社会背景下都保持平等主义。北美太平洋西北海岸的海岸Salish协会存在严重的不平等现象,但仍在政治上分散权力,并在决策方面保持高度自主权(Grier 2017)。简而言之,他们用平等权换取了自治权。Borake的研究的经验成分使人们对铁器时代和中世纪的斯堪的纳维亚半岛的纪念性建筑有了新的了解(对Grier和Schwadron,2017年意义重大)。最关键的是,我们认为在许多集体的,扩张的和迭代的建筑作品中应该看到的概念,她认为这不是集中力量的重手,而是分散的集体行动的产物。这种经久不衰的工作如何能够有助于分散化政治和地方自治的认识,人们对此一直未加重视。为自治服务的集体行动似乎并不协调,但这只是从排除它的开始假设开始(见Trigger 1990)。我们确实从美国东南部的捕猎者-捕捞者的考古学中获得了类似的联系和实践的线索(例如Randall 2015; Wallis 2008),并且与Borake对Danevirke的研究相似,建造过程也很长常常会延续数千年,不断地重申,强化甚至有时重新形成社会秩序。北美西北海岸也出现了类似的想法(Grier,Angelbeck和McLay,2017年)。这样,考古学问题就变成了,我们如何自信地识别出考古记录中无政府组织的产物?缓慢的加性出现和对物联网的重复投资是否直接暗示了网络,合理的权威,自治与权力下放?这就是Borake在使用“事物场所”一词来描述此类场所时的主张-这些场所的物质性和社会性通过时间嵌入了递归和持久的关系中,反映了无政府主义原则的表达。这是我们应该在世界范围内的考古环境中评估的东西。因此,我认为Borake在无政府主义方面的应用既有理论框架也有分析框架。最终,这种方法可以提供一种方式来重新思考集体行动的物质记录的各个方面,以及与过去在许多社会环境中无疑发挥作用的一组核心原则之间的关系。在这个意义上说,
更新日期:2019-12-01
down
wechat
bug