Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T03:14:55.511Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Craft Theory in Prehistory: Case Studies from the Mesolithic of Britain and Ireland

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 October 2019

Ben Elliott
Ben Elliott*
Affiliation:
School of Archaeology, University College Dublin, Belfield, Dublin, Ireland
*
Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper reflects critically on the use of the term ‘craft’ within prehistoric archaeology and its recent rise to prominence within a variety of analytical contexts. Having briefly evaluated the way in which prehistorians employ craft, it moves on to consider the potential value that Craft Theory, a growing interdisciplinary body of literature relating to practices of making, might hold for thinking about prehistoric material culture within an archaeological context. Three case studies originating from Mesolithic Britain and Ireland are used as a vehicle to explore some of this potential in practice, before a broader discussion reflects on these initial efforts and sketches out other areas of interest for future research. The picture which emerges from this discussion is one of promise, within which prehistorians simultaneously draw from, and contribute towards, the ongoing interdisciplinary debates on craft in contemporary society.

Résumé

La théorie de l’artisanat à la préhistoire: expériences au mésolithique de la Grande-Bretagne et de l’Irlande de Ben Elliott

Cet article apporte une réflexion critique sur l’usage du terme ‘artisanat’ dans l’archéologie préhistorique et sa récente ascension à une place proéminente dans une gamme de contextes analytiques. Ayant brièvement analysé la façon dont les préhistoriens emploient artisanat, il s’étend pour considérer l’éventuelle valeur de la théorie de l’artisanat. Un corpus de littérature interdisciplinaire grandissant ayant trait aux pratiques de fabfrication pourrait nous conduire à considérer une culture matérielle préhistorique à l’intérieur d’un contexte archéologique. Trois études de cas provenant du mésolithique britannique et irlandais uilisés comme véhicule pour explorer certain de ce potentiel en pratique, avant qu’une discussion plus étendue ne réfléchisse sur ces efforts initiaux et ne trace d’autres aires d’intérêt pour de futures recherches. C’est une image prometteuse qui se dégage de cette discussion, dans laquelle les préhistoriens puisent et simultanément contribuent aux débats interdisciplinaires en cours sur l’artisanat dans la société contemporaine.

Zussamenfassung

Craft Theory in der Vorgeschichte: Experimente im Mesolithikum Großbr, itanniens und Irlands, von Ben Elliot

Dieser Beitrag stellt Überlegungen an zur Nutzung des Begriffs „Handwerk“ in der Prähistorischen Archäologie und zu seiner steigenden Bedeutung innerhalb einer Vielzahl analytischer Kontexte. Nach einer kurzen Begutachtung der Verwendung des Begriffs „Handwerk“ durch Prähistorikerinnen und Prähistoriker wird der potenzielle Nutzen betrachtet, den die „Craft Theory“ – ein wachsendes interdisziplinäres Spektrum an Literatur zu Praktiken des Herstellens – für die Untersuchung prähistorischer materieller Kultur in einem archäologischen Kontext bereitstellen kann. Drei Fallbeispiele aus dem Mesolithikum Großbritanniens und Irlands werden als Mittel genutzt, um einen Teil des Potentials in der Praxis zu erproben, anschließend wird in einer breiteren Diskussion über diese Bemühungen reflektiert und weitere mögliche Felder für künftige Forschungen skizziert. Das Bild, das aus dieser Diskussion entsteht, ist ein vielversprechendes, in dem Prähistoriker zugleich von den aktuellen interdisziplinären Debatten zu „Handwerk“ in der gegenwärtigen Gesellschaft profitieren und ihren Beitrag zu diesen leisten.

Resumen

Teoría del artesanado en Prehistoria: experimentos en el Mesolítico de Gran Bretaña e Irlanda, por Ben Elliott

Este artículo reflexiona críticamente sobre el empleo del término ‘artesanía’ en el ámbito de la arqueología prehistórica, y su reciente protagonismo en una gran variedad de contextos analíticos. A partir de una breve evaluación de la forma en la que los prehistoriadores emplean el término ‘artesanía’, se hace necesario considerar el valor potencial de la ‘teoría de artesanado’, un creciente corpus interdisciplinar de bibliografía relacionada con las prácticas de ‘hacer’ que podría proponer nuevas interpretaciones sobre la cultura material dentro de un contexto arqueológico. Se utilizan tres casos de estudio originados a partir del Mesolítico de Gran Bretaña e Irlanda como vehículo para explorar este potencial en la práctica, precedidos por una amplia discusión que refleja estos esfuerzos y esbozos en otras posibles áreas de interés para investigaciones futuras. El panorama que emerge de esta discusión es prometedor y en él se basan los prehistoriadores contribuyendo al mismo tiempo a los actuales debates sobre “artesanía” en las sociedades actuals.

Keywords

craftmakingmakersmaterial culture theoryMesolithic
Type
Research Article
Information
Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society , Volume 85 , December 2019 , pp. 161 - 176
Copyright
© The Prehistoric Society, 2019 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Adamson, G. 2007. Thinking through Craft. Oxford: Berg CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Adamson, G. 2013. The Invention of Craft. London: Bloomsbury CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alasheev, S. 1995. On a particular kind of love and the specificity of Soviet production. In Clarke, S. (ed.), Management and Industry in Russia: Formal and informal relations in the Russian industrial enterprise, 69–98. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Google Scholar
Black, A. & Burisch, N. 2010. Craft hard, die free: Radical curatorial strategies for craftivism in unruly contexts. In Adamson, G. (ed.), The Craft Reader, 609–19. Oxford: Berg Google Scholar
Black, A. & Burisch, N. 2018. Craft on Demand: The new politics of the handmade. London: I B Tauris Google Scholar
Brysbaert, A. 2014. Talking shop: Multicraft workshop materials and architecture in prehistoric Tiryns, Greece. In Rebay-Salisbury, K., Brysbaert, A. & Foxhall, L. (eds), Material Crossovers: Knowledge networks and the movement of technological knowledge between craft traditions, 37–61. London: Routledge Google Scholar
Brysbaert, A. 2017. Artisans versus nobility? Crafting in context: Introduction. In Brysbaert, A. & Gorgues, A. (eds), Artisans vs Nobility: Multiple identities of elites and ‘commoners’ viewed through the lens of crafting from the chalcolithic to the iron ages in Europe and the Mediterranean, 13–26. Leiden: Sidestone Press Google Scholar
Chua, L. & Elliott, M. (eds). 2013. Distributed Objects: Meaning and mattering after Alfred Gell. Oxford: Berghahn Google Scholar
Cobb, H. 2007a. Media for movement and making the world: Exploring materiality and identity in the Mesolithic of the Northern Irish Sea Basin. Internet Archaeology 22; https://doi.org/10.1141/ia.22.6 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cobb, H. 2007b. Mutable materials and the production of persons: Reconfiguring understandings of identity in the Mesolithic of the northern Irish Sea basin. Journal of Iberian Archaeology 9/10, 123–36Google Scholar
Cochrane, A. & Jones, A. 2012a. Visualising the Neolithic: An introduction. In Cochrane & Jones 2012b, 1–14 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cochrane, A. & Jones, A. (eds). 2012b. Visualising the Neolithic: Abstraction, figuration, performance, representation. Oxford: Oxbow Books Google Scholar
Cochrane, A. & Jones, A. 2018. Materials, process, image: The art of Neolithic Britain and Ireland. In Cochrane, A. & Jones, A. (eds), The Archaeology of Art: Materials, practices, affects, 137–72. London: Routledge CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Collingwood, R. 1938. The Principles of Art. Oxford: Clarendon Press Google Scholar
Conneller, C. 2005. Moving beyond sites: Mesolithic technology in the landscape. In Milner, N. & Woodman, P. (eds), Mesolithic Studies: At the beginning of the 21st century, 42–55. Oxford: Oxbow Books Google Scholar
Conneller, C. 2011. An Archaeology of Materials: Substantial transformations in Early prehistoric Europe. Oxford: Routledge Google Scholar
Conneller, C., Little, A. & Birchenall, J. 2018. Making space through stone. In Milner et al. 2018a, 157–221 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dewsbury, J.D. & Bissell, D. 2014. Habit geographies: The perilous zones in the life of the individual. cultural geographies 22(1), 21–8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elliott, B. & Little, A. 2018. Barbed points. In Milner et al. 2018b, 273–95CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elliott, B. & Milner, N. 2010. Making a point: A critical review of the barbed point manufacturing process practised at Star Carr. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 76, 75–94 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elliott, B., Knight, B. & Little, A. 2018. Osseous technology. In Milner et al. 2018b, 255–72Google Scholar
Finlay, N. 2000. Microliths in the making. In Young, R. (ed.), Mesolithic Lifeways: Current research in Britain and Ireland, 23–31. Leicester: Leicester University Archaeology Monographs Google Scholar
Gell, A. 1998. Art and Agency: An anthropological theory. Oxford: Clarendon Google Scholar
Gijn, A.L. van. 2010. Flint in Focus: Lithic biographies in the Neolithic and Bronze Age. Leiden: Sidestone Press Google Scholar
Gijn, A. van & Little, A. 2016. Tools, use wear and experimentation: Extracting plants from stone and bone. In Hardy, K. & Kubiank-Martens, L. (eds), Wild Harvest: Plants in the hominin and pre-agrarian human worlds, 135–54. Oxford: Oxbow Books CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greenlees, R. 2016. The UK craft sector isn’t a ‘hipster’ economy. It’s sparking innovation. The Guardian. Available at: http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/18/uk-craft-sector-isnt-hipster-economy-manufacturing [Accessed 3 September 2018]Google Scholar
Groom, N. 2013. ‘Let’s discuss over country supper soon’ – Rural realities and rustic representations. The Clearing. Available at: https://www.littletoller.co.uk/the-clearing/lets-discuss-over-country-supper-soon-rebekah-brooks-and-david-cameron-rural-realities-and-rustic-representations-nick-groom/ [Accessed 27 February 2018]Google Scholar
Gropius, W. 1992. The theory and organization of the Bauhaus (1923). In Harrison, C. & Wood, P. (eds), Art in Theory, 340–46. London: Blackwell Google Scholar
Guyer, P. 2002. Beauty and utility in eighteenth-century aesthetics. Eighteenth-century Studies 35(3), 439–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harris, S. 2014. Sensible dress: The sight, sound, smell and touch of Late Ertebølle Mesolithic cloth types. Cambridge Archaeological Journal 24(1), 37–56 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hill, L. 2014. Time and the practice of charcoal burning. cultural geographies 21(3), 411–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Høgseth, H. 2012. Knowledge transfer: The craftsmen’s abstraction. In Wendrich 2012, 61–78 Google Scholar
Ingold, T. 2011. Being Alive: Essays on movement, knowledge and description. Oxford: Routledge CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, A., Cochrane, A., Carter, C., Dawson, I., Diaz-Guardamino, M., Kotuoula, E. & Minkin, L. 2015. Digital imaging and prehistoric imagery: A new analysis of the Folkton Drums. Antiquity 89(347), 1083–95CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jordan, P. 2015. Technology as Human Social Tradition: Cultural transmission among hunter-gatherers. Oakland, CA: University of California Press Google Scholar
Kennedy, J. 2013. Terror in the terroir: Resisting the rebranding of the countryside. The Quietus Wreath Lectures. Available at: http://thequietus.com/articles/14114-country-life-british-politics-uncanny-music-art [Accessed 27 February 2018]Google Scholar
Koerner, J. 1999. Editorial. RES: Anthropology and Aesthetics 36, 5–19 Google Scholar
Knutsson, K., Knutsson, H., Apel, J. & Glørstad, H. (eds). 2018. Technology of Early Settlement in Northern Europe: Transmission of knowledge and culture. Sheffield: Equinox Google Scholar
Kristiansen, K. & Larsson, T. 2005. The Rise of Bronze Age Society: Travels, transmissions and transformations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Google Scholar
Kuijpers, M. 2015. The sound of fire, taste of copper, feel of bronze and colours of the cast: Sensory aspects of metalworking technology. In Stig Sørensen, M.L. & Rebay-Salisbury, K. (eds), Embodied Knowledge: Perspectives on belief and technology, 137–50. Oxford: Oxbow Books Google Scholar
Kuijpers, M. 2018. An Archaeology of Skill: Metalworking skill and material specialization in Early Bronze Age Central Europe. Oxford: Routledge Google Scholar
Latham, A. 2003. Research, performance, and doing human geography: Some reflections on the Diary-Photograph, Diary-Interview Method. Environment & Planning A 35(11), 1993–2017 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laurier, E. 2014. Dissolving the dog: The home made video. cultural geographies 21(4), 627–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lave, J. 1988. Cognition in Practice: Mind, mathematics and culture in everyday life. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lave, J. & Wenger, E. 1991. Situated Learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Little, A., Elliott, B., Conneller, C., Pomstra, D., Evans, A., Fitton, L., Holland, A., Davis, R., Kershaw, R., O’Connor, S., O’Connor, T., Sparrow, T., Wilson, A., Jordan, P., Collins, M., Colonese, A., Craig, O., Knight, R., Lucquin, A., Taylor, B. & Milner, N. 2016. Technological analysis of the world’s earliest shamanic costume: A multi-scalar, experimental study of a red deer headdress from the Early Holocene site of Star Carr, North Yorkshire, UK. PloS ONE 11(4), p.e0152136 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Little, A., van Gijn, AL., Collins, T., Cooney, G., Elliott, B., Gilhooly, B., Charlton, S. & Warren, G. 2017. Stone dead? Uncovering Early Mesolithic mortuary rites, Hermitage, Ireland. Cambridge Journal of Archaeology 27(2), 223–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mann, J. 2017. Knitting the archive: Shetland lace and ecologies of skilled practice. cultural geographies 25(1), 91–106 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mellars, P., Boyle, K., Bar-Yosef, O. & Stringer, C. (eds). 2007. Rethinking the Human Revolution: New behavioural and biological perspectives on the origin and dispersal of modern humans. Cambridge: MacDonald Institute Google Scholar
Miller, D. 1991. Material Culture and Mass Consumption. Oxford: Blackwell Google Scholar
Miller, D. 1998. Material Cultures: Why some things matter. Oxford: Routledge CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, D. (ed.) 2005. Materiality. Durham, NC: Duke University Press CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, D. 2011. The power of making. In Charny, D. (ed.), The Power of Making: The importance of being skilled, 14–29. London: V&A/Crafts Council Google Scholar
Milne, S. 2005. Palaeo-Eskimo novice flintknapping in the Eastern Canadian Arctic. Journal of Field Archaeology 30(3), 329–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Milne, S. 2012. Lithic raw material availability and Palaeo-Eskimo novice flintknapping. In Wendrich 2012, 119–44Google Scholar
Milner, N., Bamforth, M., Beale, G., Carty, J., Konstantinos, C., Croft, S., Conneller, C., Elliott, B., Fitton, L., Knight, R., Kröger, R., Little, A., Needham, A., Robson, H., Rowley, C. & Taylor, B. 2016. A unique engraved shale pendant from the site of Star Carr: The oldest Mesolithic art in Britain. Internet Archaeology 40, doi:10.11141/ia.40.8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Milner, N., Conneller, C. & Taylor, B. (eds). 2018a. Star Carr Volume 1: A persistent place in a changing world. London: White Rose University Press Google Scholar
Milner, N., Conneller, C. & Taylor, B. (eds). 2018b. Star Carr Volume 2: Studies in technology, subsistence and environment. York: White Rose University Press Google Scholar
Moholy-Nagy, L. 1927. Response to Ernö Kallai. i10 1(6), 227–40Google Scholar
Morris, R. 1970. Some notes on the phenomenology of making: The search for the motivated. ArtForum International, 33–40 Google Scholar
Morris, S. 2017. Hats off to craft skills – before they disappear for good. The Guardian. Available at: http://www.theguardian.com/culture/2017/aug/04/hats-heritage-crafts-association-artisanship [Accessed 3 September 2018]Google Scholar
Morris, W. 1915. Art and industry in the fourteenth century. In Morris, M. (ed.), Collected Works of William Morris, 375–90. London: Longmans Google Scholar
Munro, R. 1908. On the transition between the Palaeolithic and Neolithic civilizations in Europe. Archaeological Journal 65, 205–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Myrone, M. 2007. The Society of Antiquaries and the graphic arts: George Vertue and his legacy. In Pearce, S. (ed.), Visions of Antiquity: The Society of Antiquaries of London 1707–2007, 99–122. London: Society of Antiquaries Google Scholar
Nakashima, G. 2010. The soul of a tree. In Adamson, G. (ed.), The Craft Reader, 219–25. Oxford: Berg Google Scholar
Niedderer, K. 2009. Relating the production of knowledge and the production of artefacts in research. In Niedderer, K. & O’Riely, T. (eds), Connections and Reflections: On the relationship between creative production and academic research, 59–68. Helsinki: University of Art and Design Helsinki Google Scholar
Olsen, B. 2013. Material culture after text: Re-remembering things. Norwegian Review of Archaeology 36(2), 87–104 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parsons, G. & Carlson, A. 2008. Functional Aesthetics. Oxford: Oxford University Press Google Scholar
Patchett, M. 2016. The taxidermist’s apprentice: Stitching together the past and present of a craft practice. cultural geographies 23(3), 401–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Payne, E. 2017. The craft of musical performance: Skilled practice in collaboration. cultural geographies 25(1), 107–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Phillips, C. 1989. Photography in the Modern Era: European documents and critical writings, 1913-1940. New York, NY: New York Metropolitan Art Museum Google Scholar
Price, S. 1989. Primitive Art in Civilized Places. Chicago: Chicago University Press Google Scholar
Pye, D. 1968. The Nature of Art and Workmanship. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Google Scholar
Rebay-Salisbury, K., Brysbaert, A. & Foxhall, L. (eds). 2014. Material Crossovers: Knowledge networks and the movement of technological knowledge between craft traditions. London: Routledge Google Scholar
Renfrew, C. 2007. Prehistory: The making of the human mind. London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson Google Scholar
Risatti, H. 2007. A Theory of Craft: Function and aesthetic expression. Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press Google Scholar
Ruskin, J. 1892. The Nature of Gothic: A chapter of the stones of Venice. London: Kelmscott Press Google Scholar
Samadder, R. 2018. Craft has the power to save us all – a wooden spoon at a time. The Guardian. Available at: http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/sep/02/craft-mindfulness-welldoing-creative-industry [Accessed 3 September 2018]Google Scholar
Sauchelli, A. 2013. Functional beauty, perception, and aesthetic judgements. British Journal of Aesthetics 53(1), 41–53 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sennett, R. 2008. The Craftsman. London: Penguin Google Scholar
Taylor, B., Conneller, B., Milner, N., Elliott, B., Little, A., Knight, R. & Bamforth, M. 2018. Human lifeways. In Milner et al. 2018a, 245–72Google Scholar
Thrift, N. 2008. Non-Representational Theory: Space, politics, affect. London: Routledge CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomas, J. 2013. The Birth of Neolithic Britain: An interpretive account. Oxford: Oxford University Press CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Warren, G. 2005. Mesolithic Lives in Scotland. Stroud: Tempus Google Scholar
Warren, G. forthcoming. Excavations at the Sands of Forvie. Edinburgh: Society of Antiquaries of Scotland Google Scholar
Watkins, T. 2010. New light on Neolithic revolution in south-west Asia. Antiquity 84(325), 621–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wendrich, W. (ed.) 2012. Archaeology and Apprenticeship: Body knowledge, identity, and communities of practice. Tucson, AZ: University of Arizona Press Google Scholar
Wenger, E. 1998. Communities of Practice: Learning, meaning and identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wick, R. 2000. Teaching at the Bauhaus. Stuttgart: Hatje Cantz Google Scholar
Yanagi, S. 2018. The Beauty of Everyday Things. London: Penguin Google Scholar
Yarrow, T. & Jones, S. 2014. ‘Stone is stone’: Engagement and detachment in the craft of conservation masonry. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute 20(2), 256–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar