Academic literature on the topic 'Social aspects of Prehistoric figurines'
Create a spot-on reference in APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard, and other styles
Consult the lists of relevant articles, books, theses, conference reports, and other scholarly sources on the topic 'Social aspects of Prehistoric figurines.'
Next to every source in the list of references, there is an 'Add to bibliography' button. Press on it, and we will generate automatically the bibliographic reference to the chosen work in the citation style you need: APA, MLA, Harvard, Chicago, Vancouver, etc.
You can also download the full text of the academic publication as pdf and read online its abstract whenever available in the metadata.
Journal articles on the topic "Social aspects of Prehistoric figurines"
Begun, Erica. "THE MANY FACES OF FIGURINES." Ancient Mesoamerica 19, no. 2 (2008): 311–18. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0956536108000412.
Full textHamilton, Naomi. "Can We Interpret Figurines?" Cambridge Archaeological Journal 6, no. 2 (October 1996): 281–307. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0959774300001748.
Full textRachman, Dikdik Adikara. "Majapahit Terracotta Figurines: Social Environment and Life." Humaniora 7, no. 1 (January 30, 2016): 29. http://dx.doi.org/10.21512/humaniora.v7i1.3394.
Full textOverholtzer, Lisa. "SO THAT THE BABY NOT BE FORMED LIKE A POTTERY RATTLE: AZTEC RATTLE FIGURINES AND HOUSEHOLD SOCIAL REPRODUCTIVE PRACTICES." Ancient Mesoamerica 23, no. 1 (2012): 69–83. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0956536112000053.
Full textAtakuman, Çiğdem. "Figurines of the Anatolian Early Bronze Age: the assemblage from Koçumbeli-Ankara." Anatolian Studies 67 (2017): 85–108. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0066154617000023.
Full textLee, Yun Kuen, and Naicheng Zhu. "Social integration of religion and ritual in prehistoric China." Antiquity 76, no. 293 (September 2002): 715–23. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0003598x0009116x.
Full textHolm, Lena. "Stone Artefacts as Transmitters of Social Information - Towards a Wider Interpretation with a North Swedish Example." Current Swedish Archaeology 2, no. 1 (December 28, 1994): 151–58. http://dx.doi.org/10.37718/csa.1994.08.
Full textVitezovic, Selena. "Studies of technology in prehistoric archaeology." Zbornik Matice srpske za drustvene nauke, no. 137 (2011): 465–80. http://dx.doi.org/10.2298/zmsdn1137465v.
Full textJørgensen, Lise Bender. "The question of prehistoric silks in Europe." Antiquity 87, no. 336 (June 1, 2013): 581–88. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0003598x00049140.
Full textGonzalez, Ralph Araque. "Social Organization in Nuragic Sardinia: Cultural Progress Without ‘Elites’?" Cambridge Archaeological Journal 24, no. 1 (February 2014): 141–61. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s095977431400002x.
Full textDissertations / Theses on the topic "Social aspects of Prehistoric figurines"
Townsend, Andrew P. J. "The social context of prehistoric figurines and statuary from the Mediterranean and Near East." Thesis, University of Bristol, 1997. http://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.390141.
Full textPrice, Richard P. S. "Burial practice and aspects of social structure in the late Chalcolithic of north-east Bulgaria." Thesis, University of Oxford, 1997. http://ora.ox.ac.uk/objects/uuid:e93fb806-0a9a-4250-9e42-789743ca8f5e.
Full textLarsson, Thomas B. "The Bronze Age metalwork in southern Sweden aspects of social and spatial organization 1800-500 B.C. /." Umeå : University of Umeå, 1986. http://catalogue.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/cb357239764.
Full textBooks on the topic "Social aspects of Prehistoric figurines"
Egloff, Brian. Bones of the ancestors: The Ambum Stone : from the New Guinea highlands to the antiquities market to Australia. Lanham, MD: AltaMira Press, 2008.
Find full textHaarmann, Harald. Interacting with figurines: Seven dimensions in the study of imagery. West Hartford, Vt: Full Circle Press, 2009.
Find full textInteracting with figurines: Seven dimensions in the study of imagery. West Hartford, Vt: Full Circle Press, 2009.
Find full textSocial adaptation to food stress: A prehistoric southwestern example. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1985.
Find full textBurton, Frances D. Fire--the spark that ignited human evolution. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press, 2009.
Find full textMount, Charles. The early and middle bronze age in south-east Ireland: Aspects of social and cultural distributions. Dublin: University College Dublin, 1997.
Find full textGreis, Gloria Polizzotti. Relations of production: Social networks, social change and the organization of agriculture in late prehistoric southern Britain. Oxford: J. and E. Hedges, 2002.
Find full textRelations of production: Social networks, social change and the organization of agriculture in late prehistoric southern Britain. Oxford: John and Erica Hedges, 2002.
Find full textMukhopādhyāẏa, Śaṃkarānanda. Studies in pre-history and thereafter: Some aspects of Bengal social life. Calcutta: Sanskrit College, 1990.
Find full textEuropean Association of Archaeologists. Meeting. Rock art as social representation: Papers from a session held at the European Association of Archaeologists Fourth Annual Meeting in Göteborg 1998. Oxford, England: Archaeopress, 1999.
Find full textBook chapters on the topic "Social aspects of Prehistoric figurines"
Lenssen-Erz, Tilman, and Andreas Pastoors. "Reading Spoor." In Reading Prehistoric Human Tracks, 101–18. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2021. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-60406-6_6.
Full textO'Brien, William. "Technology and Work Practices." In Prehistoric Copper Mining in Europe. Oxford University Press, 2014. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780199605651.003.0013.
Full textLaneri, Nicola. "Defining the Canon of Funerary Archaeology in the Ancient Near East." In Testing the Canon of Ancient Near Eastern Art and Archaeology, 153–71. Oxford University Press, 2020. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190673161.003.0007.
Full textDean, Jeffrey S., and George J. Gumerman. "Understanding Anasazi Culture Change Through Agent-Based Modeling." In Dynamics in Human and Primate Societies. Oxford University Press, 2000. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780195131673.003.0013.
Full textSmyntyna, Olena V. "Environment in Soviet and Post-Soviet Archaeology." In Humans and the Environment. Oxford University Press, 2013. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780199590292.003.0009.
Full text"interpreted in different ways by individual scholars. Why, for example, is the preponderance of male depictions seen at Grot ta di Porto Badisco interpeted as meaning male domination of Neolithic society in Italy (Whitehouse, 1992b) whereas Hodder (1990: 68) declines to interpret the common occurrence of female figurines in the Neolithic of S.E. Europe as an indication of an equivalent female domination of society, but instead suggests "To put it over-simply, women may or may not have had any real power in the Neolithic of S.E. Europe, but certain aspects of being a woman were conceptually central."? One can cite a similar example from Skeates (1994: 207-8), where he accepts Whitehouse's identification of the human figures as males or females, but disagrees with her interpretation of male dominance and hostility between the sexes in Italian Neolithic society. Each of these two scholars also has their own interpretation of the important group 16 painted scene from the Grotta do Porto Badisco — needless to say, I also have mine. By turning to burial evidence, can one avoid the above dilemmas? Physical anthropological methods can be used to identify male and female human remains, and, knowing the sex of burials could then lead to a better understanding of the gender affiliations of accompanying grave goods. These artefacts can then be investigated in other contexts such as settlement sites. However, there is a surprising amount of uncertainty involved in sexing human remains. In this paper I wish to discuss the uncertainties in the physical anthropological methods of sexing human remains and their implications for gender studies by focussing on a recent analysis of an Iron Age necropolis at Pontecagnario, Campania, carried out by Vida Navarro (1992). PHYSICAL ANTHROPOLOGICAL METHODS OF SEXING HUMAN REMAINS Since gender is culturally constructed, it is possible for individuals or groups to have a gender that is different from their biological sex, or is intermediate or anomalous in some way. For example, in Ancient Rome, a Vestal Virgin had an ambiguous status in Roman society as shown by the fact that she could give evidence in a law court like a man. Usually Roman women had to be represented by a male relation or their spouse and could not speak in court on their own behalf or give evidence (Beard 1980: 17). Nevertheless, a Vestal Virgin was still a woman, and was allowed to marry, if she so wished, after her term of office finished (Beard 1980:, 14, note 21). Although ambiguous groups of this kind have been recognised in many societies, it is nonetheless the case that one would expect a high level of correlation between biological sex and social gender. The accurate identification of the biological sex of human remains would therefore be a great step forward in understanding gender construction and gender roles in prehistory. Unfortunately, physical anthropological methods are reliable only to a certain extent, and it is important for all archaeologists to be aware of the limitations of these methods. Like other primates, humans show sexual dimorphism i.e., the males have a larger body and show other skeletal differences from females, especially in the shape of the pelvis. When an intact pelvis is present in a burial, the identification of those remains as male or female can be made with 95% confidence (Krogman & Iscan 1986: 259). This, of course, applies to recent skeletal material, as the morphological and morphometric methods for sex identification used by anthropologists are based on reference collections from modern human populations. As Gotherstrom et ¿z/. (1997) point out, the application of these standards to prehistoric remains may be inappropriate. Prehistoric females may have been more skeletally robust, so that in the absence of a diagnostic pelvis, they could appear to be males, according to standards derived from modern populations. The pelvis anchors muscles, and "Considering the plasticity of the skeleton in response to external forces and stimuli, there are reasons to proceed with caution in interpreting all morphological differences in the pelvic region as a result of differential reproductive function." (Gotherstrom et al. 1997)." In Gender & Italian Archaeology, 44–58. Routledge, 2016. http://dx.doi.org/10.4324/9781315428178-13.
Full text