Loading…

Three Little Birds: Reassembling Typological Thought

The typologies that archaeologists use to classify artefacts and situate them chronologically and culturally are crucial tools of the discipline; when left unquestioned, however, they tend to produce reductive and essentializing understandings of the past. Like all theoretical interventions, assembl...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Norwegian archaeological review 2023-07, Vol.56 (2), p.158-179
Main Authors: Gallo, Tiziana, Cipolla, Craig N.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:The typologies that archaeologists use to classify artefacts and situate them chronologically and culturally are crucial tools of the discipline; when left unquestioned, however, they tend to produce reductive and essentializing understandings of the past. Like all theoretical interventions, assemblage theory questions the unquestioned, in this case, asking archaeologists to radically rethink the relationality of the world and the power and vibrancy of nonhuman and nonliving things like stone. In this article, we take an assemblage-based approach to an old typological problem - sorting birdstones. Since the mid-19th century, collectors and archaeologists categorized birdstones found throughout the American Northeast according to evolutionary or culture-historical principles. These approaches paid little attention to different varieties of stone, often regarding birdstones as if they were passive reflections of normative mindsets that came in only three culture-specific types. Here, we explore how archaeologists might 'reassemble' typological thought, analysing and thinking through a large sample of materially varied birdstones to find much more than three little birds. Recognizing how the shared and specific capacities of different stones actively contributed to the multiplicity of birdstone morphologies resituates them as singular and changing assemblages while highlighting the potentials of questioning the fixity of both typological and material categories at large.
ISSN:0029-3652
1502-7678
DOI:10.1080/00293652.2023.2261945