Do Ut Des – the Relation of Material History and Archaeology of Religion to the Study of Religions*.
Archaeology as "material history" and the study of religions mutually reciprocate through their shared interest in the ability of people to establish memories and create imaginaries. Starting from this presupposition, the article evaluates the approaches used in archaeology to analyse the practices...
| Publicado en: | Journal of Religious History Vol. 46; no. 4; pp. 726 - 759 |
|---|---|
| Autor principal: | |
| Formato: | Artículo |
| Publicado: |
Wiley-Blackwell
Dec2022
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | Ver este registro en EBSCOhost |
| fields | @attributes: recordID: 1 pdfLink: plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=hlh&AN=161246040&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: hlh uiTerm: 161246040 longDbName: Humanities International Complete uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: jinfo: jid: 00224227 53N jtl: Journal of Religious History issn: 00224227 maglogo: Y pubinfo: dt: Dec2022 vid: 46 iid: 4 pid: 480 pub: Wiley-Blackwell artinfo: ui: 161246040 10.1111/1467-9809.12911 ppf: 726 ppct: 33 formats: fmt: – @attributes: type: T – @attributes: type: C – @attributes: type: P size: 7MB tig: atl: Do Ut Des – the Relation of Material History and Archaeology of Religion to the Study of Religions*. aug: au: Rieger, Anna‐Katharina affil: Institute of Classics, University of Graz, Graz, Austria su: Historical archaeology Religions Material culture Cultural studies Archaeology sug: subj: Historical archaeology Religions Material culture Cultural studies Archaeology ab: Archaeology as "material history" and the study of religions mutually reciprocate through their shared interest in the ability of people to establish memories and create imaginaries. Starting from this presupposition, the article evaluates the approaches used in archaeology to analyse the practices of past peoples. Because of the fragmented nature of the evidence, archaeological methods focus on detailed descriptions, chronologies and operationalising comparisons, all of which are also applicable to the study of religions. Beyond this, both employ theories from sociology as well as from economical, political, and cultural studies. In order to bring these tools to bear on the memory and the imaginary of (past) people, five analytical categories in which human activities can be discursively appropriated are distinguished: space, object, time, context, and practice. Memory and the imaginary converge in these categories, which can be investigated in both archaeology and the study of religions, making a reciprocal exchange between the disciplines possible. Archaeology can enrich the fields of religion and history and related societal discourses in a fruitful way by making clear similarities, differences, and changes in religions through their reflections in material culture, thus making religion more tangible, whereas archaeology benefits from the cross‐cultural and diachronic perspective present in the study of religions. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: Article src: R language: English refInfo: copyright: @attributes: flag: Y custom: Copyright of Journal of Religious History is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. item: Journal of Religious History holder: Wiley-Blackwell dt: @attributes: year: 2022 holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|