Материјална култура

Материјална култура је део културе који чине сви материјални производи (оруђа, оружја, грађевине, саобраћајнице, разноврсни технички, пољопривредни и индустријски производи), чија је основна сврха задовољење човекових телесних потреба (за храном, водом, заштитом итд.).

У археологији, култура је начин живота који је изградила нека група или заједница људи на одређеном подручју, а који се преноси с нараштаја на нараштај; такође група, културна група. Укључује понашање, материјалне ствари, идеје, обичаје, институције, веровања и др. Име добија по значајном налазишту (епоним, на пример винчанска култура, вучедолска култура, белобрдска култура), реци (потиска култура), а рјеђе према неким кључним обележјима (култура линеарнотракасте керамике, култура врпчасте керамике, култура левкастих врчева, култура поља са урнама). Културни тип је верзија, тј. локална подгрупа с неким специфичним регионалним обележјима (брезовљански тип сопотске културе). Културни комплекс означава групу култура са деломично заједничким елементима (старчевачки културни комплекс, комплекс култура линеарнотракасте керамике).

Концепт

Different cultural groups have material culture items that differ both functionally and aesthetically due to varying cultural and social practices. This notion is observably true on the broadest scales. For example, the equipment associated with the brewing of tea varies greatly across the world. Social relations to material culture often include notions of identity and status.

Advocates of culture-historical archaeology use the notion to argue that sets of material culture can be used to trace ancient groups of people that were either self-identifying societies or ethnic groups. Archaeological culture is a classifying device to order archaeological data, focused on artifacts as an expression of culture rather than people. The classic definition of this idea comes from Gordon Childe:

We find certain types of remains – pots, implements, ornaments, burial rites and house forms – constantly recurring together. Such a complex of associated traits we shall call a "cultural group" or just a "culture". We assume that such a complex is the material expression of what today we would call "a people".

— Childe 1929, стр. v–vi

The concept of an archaeological culture was crucial to linking the typological analysis of archaeological evidence to mechanisms that attempted to explain why they change through time. The key explanations favoured by culture-historians were the diffusion of forms from one group to another or the migration of the peoples themselves. A simplistic example of the process might be that if one pottery-type had handles very similar to those of a neighbouring type but decoration similar to a different neighbour, the idea for the two features might have diffused from the neighbours. Conversely, if one pottery-type suddenly replaces a great diversity of pottery types in an entire region, that might be interpreted as a new group migrating in with this new style.

This idea of culture is known as normative culture. It relies on the assumption found in the view of archaeological culture that artifacts found are "an expression of cultural norms," and that these norms define culture. This view is also required to be polythetic, multiple artifacts must be found for a site to be classified under a specific archaeological culture. One trait alone does not result in a culture, rather a combination of traits are required.

Since the term "culture" has many different meanings, scholars have also coined a more specific term paleoculture, as a specific designation for prehistoric cultures. Critics argue that cultural taxonomies lack a strong consensus on the epistemological aims of cultural taxonomy,

Развој

The use of the term "culture" entered archaeology through 19th-century German ethnography, where the Kultur of tribal groups and rural peasants was distinguished from the Zivilisation of urbanised peoples. In contrast to the broader use of the word that was introduced to English-language anthropology by Edward Burnett Tylor, Kultur was used by German ethnologists to describe the distinctive ways of life of a particular people or Volk, in this sense equivalent to the French civilisation. Works of Kulturgeschichte (culture history) were produced by a number of German scholars, particularly Gustav Klemm, from 1780 onwards, reflecting a growing interest in ethnicity in 19th-century Europe.

The first use of "culture" in an archaeological context was in Christian Thomsen's 1836 work Ledetraad til Nordisk Oldkyndighed (норв. Guide to Northern Antiquity). In the later half of the 19th century archaeologists in Scandinavia and central Europe increasingly made use of the German concept of culture to describe the different groups they distinguished in the archaeological record of particular sites and regions, often alongside and as a synonym of "civilisation". It was not until the 20th century and the works of German prehistorian and fervent nationalist Gustaf Kossinna that the idea of archaeological cultures became central to the discipline. Kossinna saw the archaeological record as a mosaic of clearly defined cultures (or Kultur-Gruppen, culture groups) that were strongly associated with race. He was particularly interested in reconstructing the movements of what he saw as the direct prehistoric ancestors of Germans, Slavs, Celts and other major Indo-European ethnic groups in order to trace the Aryan race to its homeland or urheimat.

The strongly racist character of Kossinna's work meant it had little direct influence outside of Germany at the time (the Nazi Party enthusiastically embraced his theories), or at all after World War II. However, the more general "culture history" approach to archaeology that he began did replace social evolutionism as the dominant paradigm for much of the 20th century. Kossinna's basic concept of the archaeological culture, stripped of its racial aspects, was adopted by Vere Gordon Childe and Franz Boas, at the time the most influential archaeologists in Britain and America respectively. Childe, in particular, was responsible for formulating the definition of archaeological culture that is still largely applies today. He defined archaeological culture as artifacts and remains that consistently occur together. This introduced a "new and discrete usage of the term which was significantly different from current anthropological usage." His definition in particular was purely a classifying device to order the archaeological data.

Though he was sceptical about identifying particular ethnicities in the archaeological record and inclined much more to diffusionism than migrationism to explain culture change, Childe and later culture-historical archaeologists, like Kossinna, still equated separate archaeological cultures with separate "peoples". Later archaeologists have questioned the straightforward relationship between material culture and human societies. The definition of archaeological cultures and their relationship to past people has become less clear; in some cases, what was believed to be a monolithic culture is shown by further study to be discrete societies.

Критика

The concept of archaeological cultures is itself a divisive subject within the archaeological field. When first developed, archaeologic culture was viewed as a reflection of actual human culture.

...in the traditional view we translate present into past by collecting artifacts into groups, and naming those groups as archaeological cultures. We then make the equation between an archaeological and a human culture by making the assumption that artifacts are the expressions of cultural ideas or norms. (...) This approach (...) was termed "culture history" by many (...).

— Matthew Johnson, Archaeological Theory: An Introduction, p. 19–20

This view of culture would be "entirely satisfactory if the aim of archaeology was solely the definition and description of these entities." However, as the 1960s rolled around and archaeology sought to be more scientific, archaeologists wanted to do more than just describe artifacts, and the archaeological culture found.

Accusations came that archaeological culture was "idealist" as it assumes that norms and ideas are seen as being "important in the definition of cultural identity." It stresses the particularity of cultures: "Why and how they are different from the adjacent group." Processualists, and other subsequental critics of cultural-historical archaeology argued that archaeological culture treated culture as "just a rag-tag assemblage of ideas."

Archaeological culture is presently useful for sorting and assembling artifacts, especially in European archaeology that often falls towards culture-historical archaeology.

Литература

• Овај чланак или његов део изворно је преузет из Речника социјалног рада Ивана Видановића уз одобрење аутора.
• Childe, V. Gordon (1929). The Danube in Prehistory. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 
• Trigger, Bruce G. (2006). A history of archaeological thought (2nd изд.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-60049-1. 
• Johnson, Matthew (2019). Archaeological Theory: An Introduction. Third Edition. Wiley-Blackwell. стр. 400. ISBN 9781118475027. 
• Marwick, Ben (15. 10. 2019). „Galisonian logic devices and data availability: revitalising Upper Palaeolithic cultural taxonomies”. Antiquity. 93 (371): 1365—1367. S2CID 211672039. doi:10.15184/aqy.2019.131. CS1 одржавање: Формат датума (веза)
• McNairn, Barbara (1980). The Method and Theory of V. Gordon Childe. Edinburgh University Press. стр. 48. ISBN 0852243898. 
• Polomé, Edgar Charles (1982). Language, Society and Paleoculture. Stanford University Press. ISBN 9780804711494. 
• Reynolds, Natasha; Riede, Felix (15. 10. 2019). „House of cards: cultural taxonomy and the study of the European Upper Palaeolithic”. Antiquity. 93 (371): 1350—1358. doi:10.15184/aqy.2019.49 . CS1 одржавање: Формат датума (веза)
• Scerri, Eleanor M.L. (15. 10. 2019). „Cultural taxonomy for the European Upper Palaeolithic: a wide-ranging problem”. Antiquity. 93 (371): 1362—1364. S2CID 211661048. doi:10.15184/aqy.2019.135. CS1 одржавање: Формат датума (веза)
• Shea, John J. (15. 10. 2019). „European Upper Palaeolithic cultural taxa: better off without them?”. Antiquity. 93 (371): 1359—1361. S2CID 211663912. doi:10.15184/aqy.2019.117. CS1 одржавање: Формат датума (веза)
• Shennan, S. J. (1978). Hodder, I., ур. Archaeological 'cultures: an empirical investigation. London: Duckworth. Приступљено 30. 5. 2021. CS1 одржавање: Формат датума (веза)
• Aronin, Larissa; Hornsby, Michael; Kiliańska-Przybyło, Grażyna (2018). The Material Culture of Multilingualism. Cham, Switzerland: Springer. ISBN 9783319911038. 
• Kieschnick, John (2003). The Impact of Buddhism on Chinese Material Culture. Princeton: Princeton University Press. стр. 15. ISBN 978-0691096759. 
• Buchli, Victor (2004). Material Culture: Critical Concepts in the Social Sciences, Volume 1, Issue 1. London: Routledge. стр. 241. ISBN 978-0415267199. 
• Sheumaker, Helen; Wajda, Shirley (2008). Material Culture in America: Understanding Everyday Life. Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-CLIO. стр. xi—xii. ISBN 9781576076477. 
• Kahneman, Daniel; Knetsch, Jack L.; Thaler, Richard H. (1991-01-01). „Anomalies: The Endowment Effect, Loss Aversion, and Status Quo Bias”. The Journal of Economic Perspectives. 5 (1): 193—206. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.398.5985 . JSTOR 1942711. doi:10.1257/jep.5.1.193. 
• Strahilevitz, Michal A.; Loewenstein, George (1998-12-01). „The Effect of Ownership History on the Valuation of Objects”. Journal of Consumer Research (на језику: енглески). 25 (3): 276—289. ISSN 0093-5301. S2CID 167975046. doi:10.1086/209539. 
• Lohmann, Andrew; Arriaga, Ximena B.; Goodfriend, Wind (2003-09-01). „Close relationships and placemaking: Do objects in a couple's home reflect couplehood?”. Personal Relationships (на језику: енглески). 10 (3): 437—450. ISSN 1475-6811. doi:10.1111/1475-6811.00058. 
• Schieffelin, Edward L. (1980-01-01). „Reciprocity and the Construction of Reality”. Man. 15 (3): 502—517. JSTOR 2801347. doi:10.2307/2801347. 
• Mauss, Marcel (2000-01-01). The Gift: The Form and Reason for Exchange in Archaic Societies (на језику: енглески). W. W. Norton & Company. ISBN 9780393320435. 
• Woodward, Ian (2007). Understanding Material Culture. New York, New York: SAGE Publications Ltd. ISBN 978-0761942269. 
• Koch, Gerd (1961). Die Materielle Kulture der Ellice-Inseln. Berlin: Museum fur Volkerkunde (Ethnological Museum of Berlin). The English translation by Guy Slatter, was published as The Material Culture of Tuvalu, University of the South Pacific in Suva (1981). 
• Koch, Gerd (1986). Materielle Kultur der Gilbert-Inseln. Berlin: Museum fur Volkerkunde (Ehtnological Museum of Berlin). The English translation by Guy Slatter, was published as The Material Culture of Kiribati, University of the South Pacific in Suva (1986). ISBN 9789820200081. 
• Koch, Gerd (1971). Die Materielle Kultur der Santa Cruz-Inseln. Berlin: Museum fur Volkerkunde (Ethnological Museum of Berlin). 
• „Short Portrait: Gerd Koch”. Interviews with German anthropologists: The History of Federal German Anthropology post 1945. 20. 12. 2012. Приступљено 5. 2. 2014. CS1 одржавање: Формат датума (веза)
• Koch, Gerd (1973). „Possibilities and limitations of ethnographic film work”. University Vision. 10: 28—33. 
• Berger, Arthur Asa (2009). What Objects Mean: An Introduction of Material Culture. Walnut Creek, CA: Left Coast Press Inc. стр. 93. ISBN 9781598744118. 
• Renfrew, Colin; Bahn, Paul (2004). Archaeology: Theories, Methods and Practice (4th изд.). London: Thames & Hudson. ISBN 978-0-500-28441-4. 
• Fagan, Brian M. (1997). Archaeology. New York: Addison Wesley Longman Inc. ISBN 978-0673525253. 
• Fagan, Brian M. (1997). Archaeology. New York: Addison Wesley Longman Inc. ISBN 978-0673525253. 
• American Anthropological Association. „What is Anthropology?”. 
• Morgan, Lewis Henry (1877). Ancient Society. 
• Boas, Franz (1896). „The Limitations of the Comparative Method of Anthropology”. Science. 4 (103): 901—8. Bibcode:1896Sci.....4..901B. PMID 17815436. doi:10.1126/science.4.103.901. 
• Tim, Dant (1999-08-01). Material Culture In The Social World (на језику: енглески). McGraw-Hill Education (UK). ISBN 9780335198214. 
• Moran, Anna; O'Brien, Sorcha (2014-08-28). Love Objects: Emotion, Design and Material Culture (на језику: енглески). A&C Black. ISBN 9781472517180. 

Спољашње везе

• American Materialism
• Woodward, Sophie. „Material Culture”. Oxford. Приступљено 4. 12. 2013. CS1 одржавање: Формат датума (веза)