Skip to main content

Landscape Phenomenology, GIS and the Role of Affordance

Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory volume 19, pages 601–611 (2012)Cite this article

Abstract

That despite over a decade and a half of research, effective dialogue within archaeology between Geographic Information System (GIS) (on one hand) and experiential theory (on the other) remains elusive is nothing short of remarkable. The present discussion seeks to not only explore the reasons behind this impasse but to suggest that perhaps the time for dialogue has passed and rather than building bridges, researchers in archaeological GIS should instead begin to build their own theoretical frameworks. To this end, a discussion of affordance (and its potential application in the field of experiential analysis) is offered.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

References

  • Aldenderfer, M., & Maschner, H. D. G. (Eds.). (1996). Anthropology, space and geographic information systems. New York: OUP.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barrett, J. C., & Ko, I. (2009). A phenomenology of landscape: a crisis in British landscape archaeology? Journal of Social Archaeology, 9(3), 275–294.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bender, B. (Ed.). (1993). Landscape: politics and perspectives. Oxford: Berg.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brück, J. (2005). Experiencing the past? The development of a phenomenological archaeology in British prehistory. Archaeological Dialogues, 12(1), 45–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chadwick, A. (2004). ‘Geographies of sentience’—an introduction to space, place and time. In A. Chadwick (Ed.), Stories from the landscape: archaeologies of inhabitation (pp. 1–32). Oxford: British Archaeological Reports. Int. Ser. 1238.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chemero, A. (2003). An outline of a theory of affordances. Ecological Psychology, 15(2), 181–195.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cummings, V. (2008). Virtual reality, visual envelopes, and characterizing landscape. In B. David & J. Thomas (Eds.), Handbook of landscape archaeology (pp. 285–290). California: Left Coast Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fleming, A. (1999). Phenomenology and the megaliths of Wales: a dreaming too far? Oxford Journal of Archaeology, 18, 119–125.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frieman, C., & Gillings, M. (2007). Seeing is perceiving? World Archaeology, 39(1), 4–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gaffney, V., & van Leusen, M. (1995). Postscript: GIS, environmental determinism and archaeology. In G. Lock & Z. Stančič (Eds.), Archaeology and geographic information systems: a European perspective (pp. 367–382). London: Taylor & Francis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gaffney, V., Stančič, Z., & Watson, H. (1996). Moving from catchments to cognition: tentative steps towards a larger archaeological context for GIS. In M. Aldenderfer & H. Maschner (Eds.), Anthropology, space and geographic information systems (pp. 132–154). New York: OUP.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibson, J. J. (1979). The ecological approach to visual perception. New York: Psychology Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gillings, M. (1998). Embracing uncertainty and challenging dualism in the GIS-based study of a palaeo-flood plain. European Journal of Archaeology, 1(1), 117–144.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gillings, M. (2000). The utility of the GIS approach in the collection, management, storage and analysis of surface survey data. In J. Bintliff, M. Kuna, & N. Venclova (Eds.), The future of surface artefact survey in Europe (pp. 105–120). Sheffield: SAP.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gillings, M. (2008). The Ecsegfalva landscape: affordance and inhabitation. In A. Whittle (Ed.), The early Neolithic on the Great Hungarian Plain: investigations of the Körös culture site of Ecsegfalva 23, Co. Békés (pp. 31–46). Budapest: Varia Archaeologia Hungarica.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gillings, M. (2009). Visual affordance, landscape and the megaliths of Alderney. Oxford Journal of Archaeology, 28(4), 335–356.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gillings, M. (2011). Chorography, phenomenology and the antiquarian tradition. Cambridge Archaeological Journal, 21(1), 53–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greeno, J. G. (1994). Gibson’s affordances. Psychological Review, 101(2), 336–342.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hammond, M. (2010). What is an affordance and can it help us understand the use of ICT in education? Education and Information Technologies, 15, 205–217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hodder, I. (2011). Human-thing entanglement: towards an integrated archaeological perspective. The Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, 17, 154–177.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hopkinson, T. (2007). The middle Palaeolithic leaf points of Europe. Oxford: British Archaeological Reports. BAR Int. Ser.

  • Hunt, E. D. (1992). Upgrading site catchment analyses with the use of GIS: investigating the settlement patterns of horticulturalists. World Archaeology, 24(2), 283–309.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hutchby, I. (2001). Technologies, texts and affordances. Sociology, 35(2), 441–456.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ingold, T. (1992). Culture and the perception of the environment. In E. Croll & D. Parkin (Eds.), Bush base, forest farm (pp. 39–56). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ingold, T. (2005). Comments on Christopher Tilley: the materiality of stone: explorations in landscape phenomenology. Norwegian Archaeological Review, 38(2), 122–129.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, M. (2006). On the nature of theoretical archaeology and archaeological theory. Archaeological Dialogues, 13(2), 117–132.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones, K. S. (2003). What is an affordance? Ecological Psychology, 15(2), 107–114.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Judge, W. J., & Sebastian, L. (Eds.). (1988). Quantifying the present and predicting the past: theory, method and application of archaeological predictive modelling. Denver: US Department of the Interior.

    Google Scholar 

  • Knappett, C. (2005). Thinking through material culture: an interdisciplinary perspective (archaeology, culture, and society). Philadelphia: UPP.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lake, M. (2007). Viewing space. World Archaeology, 39(1), 1–3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Llobera, M. (1996). Exploring the topography of mind: GIS, social space and archaeology. Antiquity, 70, 612–622.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lock, G., & Stančič, Z. (Eds.). (1995). Archaeology and geographic information systems: a European perspective. London: Taylor & Francis.

    Google Scholar 

  • McGrenere, J., & Ho, W. (2000). Affordances: clarifying and evolving a concept. Proc Graph Interface, 2000, 179–186.

    Google Scholar 

  • Norman, D. A. (1988). The psychology of everyday things. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sadler, E., & Given, L. M. (2007). Affordance theory: a framework for graduate students’ information behaviour. Journal of Documentation, 63(1), 115–141.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sturt, F. (2006). Local knowledge is required: a rythmanalytical approach to the late Mesolithic and early Neolithic of the East Anglian Fenland, UK. Journal of Maritime Archaeology, 1, 119–139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thomas, J. (2004). Archaeology and modernity. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thomas, J. (2008). Archaeology, landscape, and dwelling. In B. David & J. Thomas (Eds.), Handbook of landscape archaeology (pp. 300–306). California: Left Coast Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tilley, C. (1994). A phenomenology of landscape. Oxford: Berg.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tilley, C. (2004). The materiality of stone. Oxford: Berg.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turvey, M. T. (1992). Affordances and prospective control: an outline of the ontology. Ecological Psychology, 4(3), 173–187.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ullah, I. (2011). A GIS method for assessing the zone of human-environmental impact around archaeological sites. Journal of Archaeological Science, 38, 623–632.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wansleeben, M., & Verhart, L. (1997). Geographical information systems: methodological progress and theoretical decline? Archaeological Dialogues, 4(1), 53–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Webster, D. S. (1999). The concept of affordance and GIS: a note on Llobera (1996). Antiquity, 73, 915–917.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wickstead, H. (2009). The uber archaeologist: GIS and the male gaze revisited. Journal of Social Archaeology, 9(2), 249–271.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

I would like to thank Jeremy Taylor for his insightful feedback on an earlier draft of this paper and the anonymous reviewers for their thoughtful and constructive comments.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Archaeology and Ancient History, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK, LE1 7RH

    Mark Gillings

Authors
  1. Mark Gillings
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mark Gillings.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Gillings, M. Landscape Phenomenology, GIS and the Role of Affordance. J Archaeol Method Theory 19, 601–611 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10816-012-9137-4

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10816-012-9137-4

Keywords

  • Affordance
  • GIS
  • Phenomenology
  • Archaeology