In the Eye of the Beholder:Using microscopic analysis in the interpretation of Tuniit (Dorset Paleo-Inuit) art
How archaeologists classify and categorise artefacts 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 Dor...
| Published in: | Arctic Anthropology |
|---|---|
| Main Authors: | , |
| Format: | Article in Journal/Newspaper |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
2023
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://hdl.handle.net/11370/8fc590cc-efec-4df8-b213-e0ddd1f27e93 https://research.rug.nl/en/publications/8fc590cc-efec-4df8-b213-e0ddd1f27e93 https://doi.org/10.3368/aa.59.1.39 https://pure.rug.nl/ws/files/787391531/39.full.pdf |
| Summary: | How archaeologists classify and categorise artefacts 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 800 - 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 artefact classification and typological organisation. |
|---|