Advertisement

Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory

, Volume 22, Issue 2, pp 428–460 | Cite as

From Metaphors to Practice

Operationalizing Network Concepts for Archaeological Stratigraphy
  • Jessica MunsonEmail author
Article

Abstract

Practice theoretic approaches to archaeological interpretation aim to solve scalar puzzles of structure and agency by employing a set of metaphors that invoke networked relations between people and things in the past. One recent example of this approach, termed “social stratigraphy,” offers an alternative to analyzing deeply buried and stratified architectural contexts by emphasizing the recursive social and physical actions of construction, which generate webs of human interaction (McAnany and Hodder, Archaeological Dialogues 16(1):1–22, 2009). In order to ensure that such descriptive metaphors align with our empirical observations, archaeologists need to account for the varied ways that social action and architectural practice intersect along multiple axes of variation (i.e., material, spatial, and temporal). By analyzing the interconnected spatial and temporal dimensions of past built environments, this paper suggests that relational concepts can offer more than heuristic functions for archaeological discourse. I offer a set of formal methods related to quantitative social network analyses as one way to operationalize, and thereby strengthen, such metaphors as applied to archaeological interpretation. These techniques are demonstrated using recent excavation data from multiple stratified architectural contexts at a minor temple center located in the Pasión region of the southern Maya lowlands to infer synchronous episodes of construction over a period of 1,600 years (850 bce–850 ce). Results of this study demonstrate that issues of spatiotemporal variability can be resolved at a microscale by formally applying network concepts to archaeological analysis.

Keywords

Networks Scale Stratigraphy Metaphor Maya 

Notes

Acknowledgments

I am grateful to T. Inomata, D. Triadan, M. Aldenderfer, S. Lansing, and M. Collard for comments on earlier versions of this manuscript. I am also indebted to the directors and other personnel of the Instituto de Antropología e Historia de Guatemala for the permit to work at Caobal. Research at Caobal was funded by the National Science Foundation (Doctoral Dissertation Improvement Grant BCS-0837536), a Junior Fellowship at Dumbarton Oaks as well as the School of Anthropology and the School of Social and Behavioral Sciences at the University of Arizona. Funding for the writing of this manuscript was provided by a postdoctoral fellowship supported by the Canada Foundation for Innovation and the British Columbia Knowledge Development Fund at Simon Fraser University as well as the Cultural Evolution of Religion Research Consortium at the University of British Columbia in conjunction with the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada. I would also like to thank J. Scholnick for insights on the topic and remarks on earlier drafts as well as the thoughtful and insightful comments provided by three anonymous reviewers.

References

  1. Adams, R. E. W. (1971). Ceramics of Altar de Sacrificios, Guatemala (Papers of the Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology, vol. 63, no. 1). Cambridge: Harvard University.Google Scholar
  2. Aldenderfer, M. S., & Blashfield, R. K. (1984). Cluster analysis (Quantitative applications in the social sciences). London: Sage University Papers.Google Scholar
  3. Anderson, M. J. (2001). A new method for non-parametric multivariate analysis of variance. Austral Ecology, 26, 32–46.Google Scholar
  4. Bachand, B. R. (2007). The Pre-Classic ceramic sequence of Punta de Chimino, Petén, Guatemala. Mayab, 19, 5–26.Google Scholar
  5. Bamforth, D. B. (2002). Evidence and metaphor in evolutionary archaeology. American Antiquity, 67(3), 435–452.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Baxter, M. J. (1994). Exploratory multivariate analysis in archaeology. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Baxter, M. J. (2003). Statistics in archaeology. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Baxter, M. J., & Cool, H. E. M. (2010). Correspondence analysyis in R for archaeologists: an educational account. Archeologia e Calcolatori, 21, 211–228.Google Scholar
  9. Bertelsen, R. (1988). Find pattern of multistratified sites: Correspondence analysis as an explorative tool. In T. Madsen (Ed.), Multivariate archaeology: Numerical approaches in Scandinavian archaeology (pp. 85–90, Justland Archaeological Society Publications XXI). Moesgard: Aarhus University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Blake, M. (2011). Building history in domestic and public space at Paso de la Amada: An examination of mounds 6 and 7. In R. G. Lesure (Ed.), Early Mesoamerican social transformations: Archaic and formative lifeways in the Soconusco Region (pp. 97–118). Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  11. Borgatti, S., Everett, M., & Freeman, L. (2002). UCINET for Windows: Software for social network analysis. Harvard: Analytic Technologies.Google Scholar
  12. Bourdieu, P., & Wacquant, L. J. D. (1992). The purpose of reflexive sociology (The Chicago Workshop). In P. Bourdieu & L. J. D. Wacquant (Eds.), An invitation to reflexive sociology (pp. 94–114). Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  13. Breiger, R. (1974). The duality of persons and groups. Social Forces, 53(2), 181–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Breiger, R. (1979). Toward an operational theory of community elite structures. Quality and Quantity, 13(1), 21–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Breiger, R. (2000). A tool kit for practice theory. Poetics, 27, 91–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Breiger, R. (2004). The analysis of social networks. In The handbook of data analysis (pp. 505–526). London: Sage.Google Scholar
  17. Breiger, R., & Mohr, J. (2004). Institutional logics from the aggregation of organizational networks: operational procedures for the analysis of counted data. Computational & Mathematical Organization Theory, 10, 17–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Brughmans, T. (2012). Thinking through networks: A review of formal network methods in archaeology. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory. doi: 10.1007/s10816-012-9133-8.
  19. Cool, H. E. M., & Baxter, M. J. (1999). Peeling the onion: An approach to comparing vessel glass assemblages. Journal of Roman Archaeology, 12, 72–100.Google Scholar
  20. de Nooy, W. (2003). Fields and networks: Correspondence analysis and social network analysis in the framework of field theory. Poetics, 31(5–6), 305–327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Djindjian, F. (1985). Seriation and toposeriation by correspondence analysis. In A. Voorrips & S. H. Loving (Eds.), To pattern the past (pp. 119–135). Strasbourg: Pact 11, Council of Europe.Google Scholar
  22. Duff, A. (1996). Ceramic micro-seriation: Types or attributes? American Antiquity, 61, 89–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Edling, C. R. (2002). Mathematics in sociology. Annual Review of Sociology, 28, 197–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Everitt, B. S., Landau, S., Leese, M., & Stahl, D. (2011). Cluster analysis, 5th edn. Wiley series in probability and statistics. West Sussex: Wiley.Google Scholar
  25. Foias, A. E. (1996). Changing ceramic production and exchange systems and the Classic Maya collapse in the Petexbatun Region. PhD dissertation, Department of Anthropology, Vanderbilt University.Google Scholar
  26. Gifford, J. C. (1960). The type-variety method of ceramic classification as an indicator of cultural phenomena. American Antiquity, 25(3), 341–347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Gifford, J. C. (1976). Prehistoric pottery analysis and the ceramics of Barton Ramie in the Belize Valley, Vol. 18. Memoirs of the Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology. Cambridge: Harvard University.Google Scholar
  28. Gillespie, S. (2008). History in practice: Ritual deposition at La Venta Complex A. In B. J. Mills & W. H. Walker (Eds.), Memory work: Archaeologies of material practices (pp. 109–136). Santa Fe: School of American Research Press.Google Scholar
  29. Golitko, M., Meierhoff, J., Feinman, G., & Williams, P. R. (2012). Complexities of collapse: The evidence of Maya obsidian as revealed by social network graphical analysis. Antiquity, 86, 507–523.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Hammer, Ø. (2012). PAST reference manual, version 2.16. University of Oslo, Natural History Museum.Google Scholar
  31. Hammer, Ø., Harper, D. A. T., & Ryan, P. D. (2001). PAST: Paleontological statistics software package for education and data analysis. Paleontologia Electronica, 4(1), 9.Google Scholar
  32. Hodder, I. (2012). Entangled: An archaeology of the relationships between humans and things. Malden: Wiley-Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Inomata, T. (2011). La Secuencia Cerámica de Ceibal. In V. Castillo Aguilar & T. Inomata (Eds.), Informe del Proyecto Arqueológico Ceibal-Petexbatun, La Temporada 2011 (pp. 157–167). Guatemala City: Instituto de Antropología e Historia.Google Scholar
  34. Inomata, T., Triadan, D., Aoyama, K., Castillo Aguilar, V., & Yonenobu, H. (2013). Early ceremonial constructions at Ceibal, Guatemala, and the origins of lowland Maya civilization. Science, 340, 467–471.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Joyce, R. A. (2004). Unintended consequences? Monumentality as a novel experience in Formative Mesoamerica. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory, 11(1), 5–29. doi: 10.1023/B:JARM.0000014346.87569.4a.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Joyce, R. A. (2008). Practice in and as deposition. In B. J. Mills & W. H. Walker (Eds.), Memory work: Archaeologies of material practice (pp. 25–40). Santa Fe: School for Advanced Research Press.Google Scholar
  37. Joyce, R. A., & Lopiparo, J. (2005). Postscript: Doing agency in archaeology. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory, 12(4), 365–374. doi: 10.1007/s10816-005-846i.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Keane, W. (2005). Signs are not the garb of meaning: On the social analysis of material things. In D. Miller (Ed.), Materiality (pp. 182–205). Durham: Duke University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Knappett, C. (2006). Beyond skin: Layering and networking in art and archaeology. Cambridge Archaeological Journal, 16(2), 239–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Knappett, C. (2011). An archaeology of interaction: Network perspectives on material culture and society. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Knappett, C. (Ed.). (2013). Network analysis in archaeology: New approaches to regional interaction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  42. Knox, H., Savage, M., & Harvey, P. (2006). Social networks and the study of relations: networks as method, metaphor and form. Economy and Society, 35(1), 113–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Kovach, W. L. (1993). Multivariate techniques for biostratigraphical correlation. Journal of the Geological Society, 150, 697–705.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Küchler, S. (2002). Malanggan: Art memory and sacrifice. Oxford: Berg.Google Scholar
  45. Kuhn, S. L. (2013). Questions of complexity and scale in explanations for cultural transitions in the pleistocene: A case study from the Early Upper Paleolithic. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory, 20(2), 194–211. doi: 10.1007/s10816-012-9146-3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1999). Philsophy in the flesh: The embodied mind and its challenge to Western thought. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  47. Latour, B. (2005). Reassembling the social: An introduction to actor-network-theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  48. Leonard, R. D., & Jones, G. T. (Eds.). (1989). Quantifying diversity in archaeology (New directions in archaeology). Cambridge: University of Cambridge.Google Scholar
  49. Levine, S. A. (1992). The problem of pattern and scale in ecology: The Robert H. MacArthur Award Lecture. Ecology, 73, 1943–1967.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Maasen, S. (1995). Who is afraid of metaphors? In S. Maasen, E. Mendelsohn, & P. Weingart (Eds.), Biology as society, society as biology: Metaphors. Sociology of the Sciences, Vol. 18 (pp. 11–36). Boston: Kluwer Academic.Google Scholar
  51. Maasen, S., Mendelsohn, E., & Weingart, P. (1995). Metaphors: Is there a bridge over troubled waters? In S. Maasen, E. Mendelsohn, & P. Weingart (Eds.), Biology as society, society as biology: Metaphors. Sociology of the sciences, Vol. 18 (pp. 1–10). Boston: Kluwer Academic.Google Scholar
  52. McAnany, P. A., & Hodder, I. (2009). Thinking about stratigraphic sequence in social terms. Archaeological Dialogues, 16(1), 1–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Mills, B. J., & Walker, W. H. (2008). Introduction: Memory, materiality, and depositional practice. In B. J. Mills & W. H. Walker (Eds.), Memory work: Archaeologies of material practices (pp. 3–24). Santa Fe: School for Advanced Research Press.Google Scholar
  54. Mills, B. J., Clark, J. J., Peeples, M. A., Haas, W. R., Jr., Roberts, J. M., Jr., Hill, J. B., et al. (2013). Transformation of social networks in the late pre-Hispanic US Southwest. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1219966110.Google Scholar
  55. Mizoguchi, K. (2009). Nodes and edges: A network approach to hierarchisation and state formation in Japan. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology, 28(1), 14–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Munson, J. (2006). Informe sobre los grupos de templo menor en Ceibal. In E. M. Ponciano, D. Triadan, & T. Inomata (Eds.), Infrome del Proyecto Arqueológico Ceibal-Petexbatun: la Temporada de Campo 2006. Guatemala City: Informe entregado al Instituto de Anthropología e Historia de Guatemala.Google Scholar
  57. Munson, (2012). Temple histories and communities of practice in early Maya society: Archaeological investigations at Caobal, Petén, Guatemala. PhD dissertation, University of Arizona, UMI Proquest.Google Scholar
  58. Munson, J., & Inomata, T. (2011). Temples in the forest: the discovery of an early Maya Community at Caobal, Petén, Guatemala. Antiquity, 85(328).Google Scholar
  59. Munson, J., & Inomata, T. (2012). Building chronologies and constructing temples: Correlating Preclassic Maya architectural sequences with multivariate techniques. Poster presented at the Society for American Archaeology Meetings, Memphis.Google Scholar
  60. Munson, J., & Macri, M. J. (2009). Sociopolitical network interactions: A case study of the Classic Maya. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology, 28, 424–438.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Munson, J., & Pinzón N. D. (n.d.). Building an early Maya community: Archaeological investigations at Caobal, Guatemala. PhD dissertation, University of Arizona, UMI Proquest.Google Scholar
  62. Neiman, F. D., & Alcock, N. W. (1995). Archaeological seriation by correspondence analysis: an application to historical documents. History & Computing, 7, 1–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. O'Brien, M. J., & Lyman, R. L. (2004). History and explanation in archaeology. Anthropological Theory, 4(2), 173–197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. O'Brien, M. J., & Lyman, R. L. (1999). Seriation, stratigraphy, and index fossils: The backbone of archaeological dating. New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum.Google Scholar
  65. Pattison, P. E., & Breiger, R. L. (2002). Lattices and dimensional representations: Matrix decompositions and ordering structures. Social Networks, 24(4), 423–444.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Pauketat, T. R. (2001). Practice and history in archaeology: An emerging paradigm. Anthropological Theory, 1(1), 73–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Pauketat, T. R. (2004). Archaeology without alternatives. Anthropological Theory, 4(2), 199–203. doi: 10.1177/1463499604042814.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Pauketat, T. R. (2011). Getting religion: Lessons from ancestral Pueblo history. In D. M. Glowacki & S. Van Keuren (Eds.), Religious transformation in the Late Pre-Hispanic Pueblo World (pp. 221–238). Tucson: The University of Arizona Press.Google Scholar
  69. Pauketat, T. R. (2012). An archaeology of the Cosmos: Rethinking agency and religion in Ancient America. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  70. Pauketat, T. R., & Alt, S. M. (2003). Mounds, memory, and contested Mississippian history. In R. M. Van Dyke & S. E. Alcock (Eds.), Archaeologies of memory (Vol. 151–179). Malden: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  71. Peeples, M. A., & Schachner, G. (2012). Refining correspondence analysis-based ceramic seriation of regional data sets. Journal of Archaeological Science, 39(8), 2818–2827. doi: 10.1016/j.jas.2012.04.040.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Ramenofsky, A. F., Neiman, F. D., & Pierce, C. D. (2009). Measuring time, population, and residential mobility from the surface at San Marcos Pueblo, North Central New Mexico. American Antiquity, 74(3), 1–26.Google Scholar
  73. Ringle, W. M. (1999). Pre-Classic cityscapes: Ritual politics among the Early Lowland Maya. In D. C. Grove & R. A. Joyce (Eds.), Social patterns in Pre-Classic Mesoamerica (pp. 183–223). Washington: Dumbarton Oaks Resarch Library and Collection.Google Scholar
  74. Robb, J., & Pauketat, T. R. (2013). From moments to millennia: Theorizing scale and change in human history. In J. Robb & T. R. Pauketat (Eds.), Big histories, human lives (pp. 3–33). Santa Fe: School of Advanced Research.Google Scholar
  75. Sabloff, J. A. (1975). Ceramics. Excavations at Seibal, Department of Peten, Guatemala, Vol. 13, no. 2). Cambridge: Memoirs of the Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology, Harvard University.Google Scholar
  76. Schiffer, M. (1987). Formation processes of the archaeological record. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press.Google Scholar
  77. Scholnick, J. (2010). Apprenticeship, cultural transmission and the evolution of cultural traditions in historic New England gravestones. PhD dissertation, University of Arizona, Tucson.Google Scholar
  78. Scholnick, J., Munson, J., & Macri, M. J. (2013). Positioning power in a multi-relational framework: A social network analysis of Classic Maya political rhetoric. In C. Knappett (Ed.), Network analysis in archaeology: New approaches to regional interaction (pp. 95–124). Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Sharer, R. J. (2006). The Ancient Maya. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  80. Shennan, S. (1997). Quantifying archaeology (2nd ed.). New York: Academic.Google Scholar
  81. Smith, K. Y., & Neiman, F. D. (2007). Frequency seriation, correspondence analysis, and Woodland period ceramic assemblage variation in the Deep South. Southeastern Archaeology, 26(1), 47–72.Google Scholar
  82. Sonnett, J., & Breiger, R. L. (2004). How relational methods matter. Culture, 19(1), 8–10.Google Scholar
  83. Stanton, T. W., & Magnoni, A. (2008). Places of remembrance: The use and perception of abandoned structures in the Maya Lowlands. In T. W. Stanton & A. Magnoni (Eds.), Ruins of the past: The use and perception of abandoned structures in the Maya Lowlands (pp. 1–25). Boulder: University Press of Colorado.Google Scholar
  84. Tilley, C. (1999). Metaphor and material culture. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  85. Tourtellot, G., III (1988). Excavations at Seibal, Department of Peten, Guatemala: Peripheral survey and excavation settlement and community patterns, Vol. 16, no. 2. Memoirs of the Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  86. Wasserman, S., & Faust, K. (1994). Social network analysis: Methods and applications. Structural analysis in the social sciences, no. 8. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  87. White, H. C., Boorman, S. A., & Breiger, R. L. (1976). Social structure from multiple networks. I. Blockmodels of roles and positions. The American Journal of Sociology, 81(4), 730–780.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Willey, G. R. (1968). One hundred years of American archaeology. In J. O. Brew (Ed.), One hundred years of anthropology (pp. 26–53). Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  89. Willey, G. R., Culbert, T. P., & Adams, R. E. W. (1967). Maya lowland ceramics: A report from the 1965 Guatemala City Conference. American Antiquity, 32(3), 289–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. Willey, G. R., Smith, A. L., Tourtellot, G., III, & Graham, I. (1975). Introduction: The site and its setting, Vol. 13, no. 1. Memoirs of the Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  91. Wylie, A. (2002). The reaction against analogy. In Thinking from things: Essays in the philosophy of archaeology (pp. 136–153). Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Human Evolutionary Studies Program, Department of ArchaeologySimon Fraser UniversityBurnabyCanada

Personalised recommendations