Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Outline

Title
Abstract
Introduction
Conclusion
References
All Topics
Earth Sciences
Geology

Fractal Worlds: An Archaeology of Nested Spatial Scales

Profile image of Peter WhitridgePeter Whitridge

2017, Arctic

https://doi.org/10.14430/ARCTIC4659
visibility

…

description

10 pages

link

1 file

Abstract

Archaeologists approach their evidence at numerous scales, from the intercontinental distributions of people and their things to the microscopic structure in a thin section. This is possible and worthwhile, in part, because people in the past also acted in, and conceived of, their worlds at a variety of scales. The precontact Inuit record reveals not only large-scale regional networks and intricate site structures, but also the diminutive worlds depicted in toys, amulets, and figurative art. The human body was the most popular object of this miniaturization discourse, and it served to anchor the fractal-like proliferation of imagined worlds in everyday bodily experience.

Related papers

Bird-David, N. (2019). Dis/working with Diagrams: How Genealogies and Maps Obscure Nanoscale Worlds (a Hunter-Gatherer Case). Social Analysis, 63(4), 43-62.
Nurit Bird-David

Social Analysis, 2019

Standard diagrammatic tools in ethnographies, locational maps, and kinship trees are supposed to help make fieldwork and its findings intelligible to readers. This article explores how, to the contrary, they obscure locals' lived worlds and the fieldwork process when they are used cross-culturally and cross-scalarly in studies of minuscule indigenous societies, anthropology's traditional study subject. I draw on my experience of producing and using these visuals, from fieldwork through to writing ethnography, in my work with foragers who live in South India in order to show the effect of these diagrammatic tools on our understanding of nanoscale communities and their intimate worlds.

View PDFchevron_right
Encompassing a Fractal World
Gil Daryn

Encompassing a Fractal World The Energetic Female Core in Myth and Everyday Life— A Few Lessons Drawn from the Nepalese Himalaya, 2006

Encompassing a Fractal World presents a groundbreaking, innovative paradigm that opens up new perspectives for understanding and analyzing Hindu life and culture. In particular, it has crucial implications for the understanding of Hindu cosmology, ritual, architecture, kinship, social relationships, and agriculture as well as modern anthropological theories of ritual, action, and agency. Gil Daryn’s main thrust is not that the fractal concept may neatly bring together much of what has been written about Hindu culture but, instead, it argues the case for an additional and gendered fractal dimension.Encompassing a Fractal World is exceptional in scope, drawing from an extensive set of comparative materials ranging from Vedic cosmogonies and sacrifice through Puranic mythology to contemporary ethnographic accounts from Nepal and India. This book is an interdisciplinary comparative work that attempts to “connect the dots,” moving beyond isolated village-based studies in order to bridge the gulf between anthropology and Hindu studies.

View PDFchevron_right
Aubrey Cannon (ed.): Structured Worlds: The Archaeology of Hunter-Gatherer Thought and Action
Charlotte B Damm

Norwegian Archaeological Review, 2013

View PDFchevron_right
sj-pdf-1-mcu-10.1177_13591835211025559 – Supplemental material for Beyond the 'thingification' of worlds: Archaeology and the New Materialisms
Louise Steel

2021

Supplemental material, sj-pdf-1-mcu-10.1177_13591835211025559 for Beyond the 'thingification' of worlds: Archaeology and the New Materialisms by Eloise Govier and Louise Steel in Journal of Material Culture

View PDFchevron_right
The Hearth, the Home and the Homeland: An Integrated Strategy for Memory Storage in Circumpolar Landscapes
Peter Dawson

The structure and symbolism associated with the home, the hearth and the landscape often serve as key metaphors within a people's cosmology. Conversely, the cosmology provides the interpretive framework for understanding the landscape and a blueprint for designing and constructing the home and the camp. In this way, the identity of the group and its association with a particular homeland is constantly reinforced through ideological threads extending from the home to the camp, the landscape and the cosmos. Using examples from two societies in the circumpolar north, we will attempt to illustrate how the cosmology and social organization of Inuit in the Canadian Arctic and Evenkis in the Siberian taiga are imprinted in the design of the house, the location and orientation of the camp, and the perception of the landscape.

View PDFchevron_right
Review of 'Structured worlds: The archaeology of hunter-gatherer thought and action' by Aubrey Cannon
Colin Pardoe

Australian Archaeology, 2013

View PDFchevron_right
The figure of the world. An insight into the development of geometry during the Neolithic
Olivier Keller

In a previous paper, 1 we argued that mankind began to do geometry as soon as the first species of human emerged 2.5 million years ago, and that this geometry underwent considerable developments until the end of the Upper Palaeolithic, which, in Europe, was around 12,000 years ago. It was geometry in the sense that it involved thoughtful work applied to a space (a pebble, the wall of cave, the surface of an object carved from bone or ivory) in order to obtain a preconceived figure (a sharp-edged flake, carved pebble or rock, handaxe, Levallois flake, retouched blade, microlith, painting, engraving, drawing or stencil), through a process of structuring space (two perpendicular symmetrical planes for the handaxe, the system of Levalloisian debitage, the interior/exterior of a representation, friezes, etc.). We have shown that this "thoughtful work" led to the production of genuine signs of lines, when the representation was limited to a recognizable outline, and to genuine signs of points, when the outline was dotted. Finally, we have argued that this period saw the creation of veritable rectangles. These were the first fundamental creations and inventions of a clearly geometric nature, despite their insertion into a practical or ritualistic context, and despite the fact that they were neither named 2 nor explicitly connected to one another within a theoretical system.

View PDFchevron_right
Structured Worlds: The Archaeology of Hunter-Gatherer Thought and Action
aubrey cannon

2014

View PDFchevron_right
"Cultural Micro-Mosaics. A problem for archaeological culture concept"
Oleg Kuznetsov

ostein Bertsto et : b can d inavian arc eo ot ica s ractice — in t eor j 'rocee din i s rom t e 6t Nor, ic TAG, es ci 200 ABSTRACT This paper is a preliminary presentation of results from our eth-no-archaeological investigations among the Evenkian hunter-gatherers in the northern Baikal area,Siberia.lts focus is on how the social organisation of hunter-gatherers is reflected in their material culture. Our conclusion is that some of the basic assumptions accepted in archaeology may need revision.

View PDFchevron_right
Structured Worlds: the Archaeology of Hunter-gatherer Thought and Action, edited by Cannon, 2011. Sheffield: Equinox; ISBN 978-1-84553-080-8 hardback £75 & US$115; x + 212 pp., 31 figs, 18 tables
aubrey cannon

Cambridge Archaeological Journal, 2012

View PDFchevron_right

References (64)

  1. Alberti, B., Jones, A.M., and Pollard, J., eds. 2013. Archaeology after interpretation: Returning materials to archaeological theory. Walnut Creek, California: Left Coast Press.
  2. Ashberry, J. 1986. Introduction. In: Foucault, M. Death and the labyrinth: The world of Raymond Roussel. Berkeley: University of California Press. xiii -xxviii.
  3. Betts, M.W., Hardenberg, M., and Stirling, I. 2015. How animals create human history: Relational ecology and the Dorset -polar bear connection. American Antiquity 80(1):89 -112. https://doi.org/10.7183/0002-7316.79.4.89
  4. Boeke, K. 1957. Cosmic view: The universe in 40 jumps. New York: John Day Company.
  5. Brown, C.T. 2001. The fractal dimensions of lithic reduction. Journal of Archaeological Science 28(6):619 -631. https://doi.org/10.1006/jasc.2000.0602
  6. Brown, C.T., Witschey, W.R.T., and Liebovitch, L.S. 2005. The broken past: Fractals in archaeology. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory 12(1):37 -78. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10816-005-2396-6
  7. Burch, E.S., Jr. 1988. Modes of exchange in north-west Alaska. In: Ingold, T., Riches, D., and Woodburn, J., eds. Hunters and gatherers, Vol. 2: Property, power, and ideology. Oxford: Berg Publishers. 95 -109.
  8. ---. 2006. Social life in northwest Alaska: The structure of Iñupiaq Eskimo nations. Fairbanks: University of Alaska Press.
  9. Butler, R., and Parr, H. 1999. Mind and body spaces: Geographies of illness, impairment and disability. London: Routledge.
  10. Butzer, K.W. 1982. Archaeology as human ecology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511558245
  11. Carpenter, E.S. 1973. Eskimo realities. New York: Holt, Reinhart and Winston.
  12. FIG.
  13. Fractal-like variation in precontact Inuit representations of human figures and in human figures themselves, varying with age and distance. ---, ed. 2011. Upside down -Arctic realities. Houston, Texas: The Menil Collection.
  14. Chase, A.F., Chase, D.Z., Weishampel, J.F., Drake, J.B., Shrestha, R.L., Slatton, K.C., Awe, J.J., and Carter, W.E. 2011. Airborne LiDAR, archaeology, and the ancient Maya landscape at Caracol, Belize. Journal of Archaeological Science 38(2):387 -398. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jas.2010.09.018
  15. Damas, D., ed. 1984. Handbook of North American Indians, Vol. 5: Arctic. Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution Press.
  16. Davidson, D.A., Carter, S.P., and Quine, T.A. 1992. An evaluation of micromorphology as an aid to archaeological interpretation. Geoarchaeology 7(1):55 -65. https://doi.org/10.1002/gea.3340070105
  17. Diachenko, A. 2013. Settlement growth as a fractal. Journal of Neolithic Archaeology 15:88 -105.
  18. Dorais, L.-J. 2010. The language of the Inuit: Syntax, semantics, and society in the Arctic. Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press.
  19. Eames, C., and Eames, R. 1977. Powers of ten: A film dealing with the relative size of things in the universe and the effect of adding another zero. Oakland, California: Blue Lotus Films.
  20. Edgeworth, M. 2010. Beyond human proportions: Archaeology of the mega and the nano. Archaeologies 6(1):138 -149. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11759-010-9125-9
  21. Fladmark, K. 1982. Microdebitage analysis: Initial considerations. Journal of Archaeological Science 9(2):205 -220. https://doi.org/10.1016/0305-4403(82)90050-4
  22. Foucault, M. 1986. Death and the labyrinth: The world of Raymond Roussel. Berkeley: University of California Press.
  23. Hamilton, S., Whitehouse, R., Brown, K., Combes, P., Herring, E., and Thomas, M.S. 2006. Phenomenology in practice: Towards a methodology for a 'subjective' approach. European Journal of Archaeology 9(1):31 -71. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461957107077704
  24. Hardenberg, M. 2010. In search of Thule children: Construction of playing houses as a means of socializing children. Geografisk Tidsskrift-Danish Journal of Geography 110(2):201 -214. https://doi.org/10.1080/00167223.2010.10669507
  25. Hodder, I. 2012. Entangled: An archaeology of the relationships between humans and things. Oxford: John Wiley and Sons. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118241912
  26. Hoffman, W.J. 1897. The graphic art of the Eskimos, based upon the collections in the National Museum. In: Report of the United States National Museum for 1895. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office. 739 -968.
  27. Holtved, E. 1944. Archaeological investigations in the Thule District. Meddelelser om Grønland 141(1-2). Copenhagen: C.A. Reitzel.
  28. Kaplan, S. 1983. Economic and social change in Labrador Neo- Eskimo culture. PhD dissertation, Bryn Mawr College, Bryn Mawr, Pennsylvania.
  29. Lasaponara, R., and Masini, N., eds. 2012. Satellite remote sensing: A new tool for archaeology. New York: Springer.
  30. Latour, B. 1988. Mixing humans and nonhumans together: The sociology of a door-closer. Social Problems 35(3):298 -310. https://doi.org/10.2307/800624
  31. Laugrand, F., and Oosten, J. 2008. When toys and ornaments come into play: The transformative power of miniatures in Canadian Inuit cosmology. Museum Anthropology 31(2):69 -84. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1548-1379.2008.00011.x
  32. LeMoine, G., Helmer, J., and Hanna, D. 1995. Altered states: Human-animal transformational images in Dorset art. In: Ryan, K., and Crabtree, P.J., eds. The symbolic role of animals in archaeology. MASCA Research Papers in Science and Archaeology. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology. 39 -49.
  33. Lepper, B.T., and Frolking, T.A. 2003. Alligator Mound: Geoarchaeological and iconographical interpretations of a Late Prehistoric effigy mound in central Ohio, USA. Cambridge Archaeological Journal 13(2):147 -167. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0959774303000106
  34. Lilley, I. 2008. Flights of fancy: Fractal geometry, the Lapita dispersal, and punctuated colonisation in the Pacific. In: Clark, G., Leach, F., and O'Connor, S., eds. Islands of inquiry: Colonisation, seafaring, and the archaeology of maritime landscapes. Terra Australis 29. Canberra: Australian National University Press. 75 -86.
  35. MacDonald, J. 1998. The Arctic sky: Inuit astronomy, star lore, and legend. Toronto, Ontario: Royal Ontario Museum/Nunavut Research Institute.
  36. Mandelbrot, B.B. 1983. The fractal geometry of nature. San Francisco: W.H. Freeman.
  37. Mathiassen, T. 1927. Archaeology of the Central Eskimo: I, descriptive part. Report of the Fifth Thule Expedition 1921 -24, Vol. 4. Copenhagen: Gyldendalske Boghandel, Nordisk Forlag.
  38. Maxwell, M.S. 1983. A contemporary ethnography from the Thule period. Arctic Anthropology 20(1):79 -87.
  39. McCartney, A.P. 1980. The nature of Thule Eskimo whale use. Arctic 33(3):517 -541. https://doi.org/10.14430/arctic2581
  40. McGhee, R. 1984. The Thule village at Brooman Point, High Arctic Canada. Archaeological Survey of Canada, Mercury Series Paper 125. Ottawa: National Museum of Man.
  41. Merkur, D. 1991. Powers which we do not know: The gods and spirits of the Inuit. Moscow: University of Idaho Press.
  42. Morrison, D. 1983. Thule culture in western Coronation Gulf. Archaeological Survey of Canada, Mercury Series Paper 116. Ottawa: National Museum of Man.
  43. ---. 1991. The Diamond Jenness collections from Bering Strait. Archaeological Survey of Canada, Mercury Series Paper 144. Hull, Quebec: Canadian Museum of Civilization.
  44. Oman, L.K. 1995. The epic of Qayaq: The longest story ever told by my people. Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press.
  45. Park, R.W. 1989. Porden Point: An intrasite approach to settlement system analysis. PhD dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of Alberta, Edmonton.
  46. ---. 1998. Size counts: The miniature archaeology of childhood in Inuit societies. Antiquity 72(276):269 -281.
  47. Rasmussen, K. 1929. Intellectual culture of the Iglulik Eskimos. Report of the Fifth Thule Expedition 1921 -24, Vol. 7(1). Copenhagen: Gyldendalske Boghandel.
  48. ---. 1931. The Netsilik Eskimos: Social life and spiritual culture. Report of the Fifth Thule Expedition 1921 -24, Vol. 8(1-2). Copenhagen: Gyldendalske Boghandel, Nordisk Forlag.
  49. Renouf, M.A.P., and Bell, T. 2006. Maritime Archaic site locations on the island of Newfoundland. In: Sanger, D., and Renouf, M.A.P., eds. The Archaic of the Far Northeast. Orono: University of Maine Press. 1 -46.
  50. Roosevelt, C.H. 2014. Mapping site-level microtopography with real-time kinematic global navigation satellite systems (RTK GNSS) and unmanned aerial vehicle photogrammetry (UAVP). Open Archaeology 1(1):29 -53. https://doi.org/10.2478/opar-2014-0003
  51. Roussel, R. 2014 (1904). La vue. Paris: Bibebook. http://www.bibebook.com/files/ebook/libre/V2/roussel_ raymond_-_la_vue.pdf
  52. Ryan, K., and Young, J. 2013. Identification of a probable aarnguaq in a Sadlermiut grave from Native Point, Southampton Island, Nunavut, Canada. Arctic Anthropology 50(1):20 -48. https://doi.org/10.3368/aa.50.1.20
  53. Schledermann, P., and McCullough, K. 2003. Late Thule culture developments on the central east coast of Ellesmere Island. Copenhagen: Danish National Museum/Danish Polar Center.
  54. Seuss, Dr. 1954. Horton hears a Who. New York: Random House.
  55. Smith, M.E. 2007. Form and meaning in the earliest cities: A new approach to ancient urban planning. Journal of Planning History 6(1):3 -47. https://doi.org/10.1177/1538513206293713
  56. Taylor, J.G. 1997. Deconstructing deities: Tuurngatsuak and Tuurngaatsuk in Labrador Inuit religion. Études/Inuit/Studies 21(1/2):141 -158.
  57. Taylor, W., Jr., and McGhee, R. 1979. Archaeological material from Creswell Bay, N.W.T. Archaeological Survey of Canada, Mercury Series Paper No. 85. Ottawa: National Museum of Man. Turner, L. 2001 (1894). Ethnology of the Ungava District, Hudson Bay Territory. Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution Press.
  58. Walls, M. 2012. Kayak games and hunting enskilment: An archaeological consideration of sports and the situated learning of technical skills. World Archaeology 44(2):175 -188. https://doi.org/10.1080/00438243.2012.669604
  59. Watts, C., ed. 2013. Relational archaeologies: Humans, animals, things. London: Routledge.
  60. Whitridge, P. 1999. The construction of social difference in a prehistoric Inuit whaling community. PhD dissertation, Department of Anthropology, Arizona State University, Tempe.
  61. ---. 2004. Landscapes, houses, bodies, things: "Place" and the archaeology of Inuit imaginaries. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory 11(2):213 -250. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:JARM.0000038067.06670.34
  62. ---. 2013. The imbrication of human and animal paths: An Arctic case study. In; Watts, C., ed. Relational archaeologies: Humans, animals, things. London: Routledge. 228 -244.
  63. ---. 2016. Inuksuk, sled shoe, place name: Past Inuit ethnogeographies. In: Lovis, W., and Whallon, R., eds. Marking the land: Hunter-gatherer creation of meaning in their environment. New York: Routledge. 89 -115.
  64. Zubrow, E.B.W. 2007. Remote sensing, fractals, and cultural landscapes: An ethnographic prolegomenon using U2 imagery. In: Wiseman, J.R., and El-Baz, F., eds. Remote sensing in archaeology. New York: Springer. 219 -235. https://doi.org/10.1007/0-387-44455-6_9

Related papers

D. Dehouve: A Play on Dimensions: Miniaturization and Fractals in Mesoamerican Ritual 2016
dehouve danièle

The use of small objects in ritual contexts has been observed in many civilizations and is usually considered from the perspective of miniaturization. This article aims to broaden this perspective and address the issue in terms of manipulation/modification of dimensions. Based on archaeological and ethnological evidence from Mesoamerica from the fifteenth century to the present, I lay the foundations for a typology of the referent: the person, object, action, or abstract idea to which a symbol refers. First, I examine the forms of miniaturiza-tion (with geomorphic and dual referents) and metaphoric miniaturization. I then consider the self-referential system provided by fractals, a system in which each shape is the referent of the pattern represented in the subsequent iteration.

View PDFchevron_right
When Toys and Ornaments Come into Play: The Transformative Power of Miniatures in Canadian Inuit Cosmology
frederic laugrand

Museum Anthropology, 2008

Inuit have been making miniatures for thousands of years, and they are still very attractive to many Inuit today. In this paper, we explore the intrinsic ambiguity of Inuit miniatures. They seem like innocent toys or ornaments, but turn out to have great transformative power. As toys, they are instrumental in transforming children into adults; as ornaments, they may be charms or amulets; as amulets, they may be weapons against enemies; and as weapons or offerings, they may take life or generate it. Appearing as images of the world, they are in fact at its origin. Every living being traditionally derived its existence from a miniature image (the tarniq). Miniatures evoke a play of deception, transforming what appears to be real into an image of the miniature.

View PDFchevron_right
Assembling bodies, making worlds - An archaeological topology of place [2013]
Marcus Brittain

2013

View PDFchevron_right
Landscapes, Houses, Bodies, Things: " Place " and the Archaeology of Inuit Imaginaries
Peter Whitridge

Although the dichotomization of space and place has spawned a lively archaeological discussion, it threatens to devolve into a troublesome binary like sex/gender. Local place-making and universalizing spatial science are not so neatly segregated. Rather than dividing and bounding the notion of an investment of locations with meaning, it can be extended to describe the intricate topologies of bodies and things, as well as landscapes. Places emerge as sites of the hybrid articulation of representations, practices, and things, as spatialized imaginaries. The notion of imaginaries and the rethinking of place are illustrated with Inuit archaeological and ethnographic examples.

View PDFchevron_right
In the Eye of the Beholder: Using Microscopic Analysis in the Interpretation of Tuniit (Dorset Paleo-Inuit) Art
Matilda Siebrecht

Arctic Anthropology, 2023

How archaeologists classify and categorize artifacts has the potential to direct and bias interpretations before analysis has taken place. A clear example of this phenomenon in arctic archaeology is the analysis of material culture classified as "art" attributed to premodern Tuniit peoples (Late Dorset Paleo-Inuit, ca. AD 500-1300). Often, analyses of Tuniit art pieces are restricted by the use of customary typologies that can impose modern assumptions of how Tuniit groups would have perceived their material culture. In this study, we address this problem by focusing not on the meaning embodied in the finished objects but on the identification of decision-making patterns of the object carvers and users as reflected through microscopic traces of manufacture and use. We argue that through such trace-focused observation, certain newly observed patterns may suggest greater diversity in decision-making processes (with regard to manufacture and use) than would be suggested by traditional typological grouping alone. This work has wide-ranging implications for how arctic archaeologists approach artifact classification and typological organization.

View PDFchevron_right

Related topics

  • Geology
    • 580 California St., Suite 400
    San Francisco, CA, 94104
    © 2025 Academia. All rights reserved