The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Prehistoric Materialities: Becoming Material in Prehistoric Britain and Ireland
Abstract
Abstract Humans occupy a material environment that is constantly changing. Yet in the twentieth century, archaeologists studying British prehistory have overlooked this fact in their search for past systems of order and pattern. Artefacts and monuments were treated as inert materials which were the outcomes of social ideas and processes. As a result materials were variously characterized as stable entities, such as artefact categories, styles, or symbols in an attempt to comprehend them. This book argues that, on the contrary, materials are vital, mutable, and creative; and archaeologists need to attend to the changing character of materials if they are to understand how past people and materials intersected to produce prehistoric societies. Rather than considering materials and societies as given, the book argues that we need to understand how these entities are performed. The book analyses the various aspects of materials, including their scale, colour, fragmentation, and assembly, in a wide-ranging discussion that covers the pottery, metalwork, rock art, passage tombs, barrows, causewayed enclosures, and settlements of Neolithic and Early Bronze Age Britain and Ireland.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“Most relevant for this study, Jones (Jones 2012b, 2012a; Jones et al. 2011) has interpreted British Neolithic rock art and material culture as reflecting an animated world view”
From Art (Pre)History: Ritual, Narrative and Visual Culture in Neolithic and Bronze Age Europe (2020) · cites this paper as Jones 2012b
Citations
Cites
Still being checked.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Alberti, B. (2016) · Annual Review of Anthropology · doi:10.1146/annurev-anthro-102215-095858 · Cited by 295
Hamilakis, Y., & Jones, A. M. (2017) · Cambridge Archaeological Journal · doi:10.1017/s0959774316000688 · Cited by 251
Self-citationEnduring relations: Exploring a paradox of new materialism
Fowler, C., & Harris, O. J. T. (2015) · Journal of Material Culture · doi:10.1177/1359183515577176 · Cited by 157
The future of archaeological theory
Thomas, J. (2015) · Antiquity · doi:10.15184/aqy.2015.183 · Cited by 63
Jakucs, J., Bánffy, E., Oross, K., Voicsek, V., Ramsey, C. B., Dunbar, E., Kromer, B., Bayliss, A., Hofmann, D., Marshall, P., et al. (2016) · Journal of World Prehistory · doi:10.1007/s10963-016-9096-x · Cited by 101
Metadata
- Authors
- Jones, A. M.
- Corresponding author
- Jones, Andrew Meirion
- Venue
- Oxford University Press eBooks
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press
- Published
- 2012-07-05
- OpenAlex
- W4248076679
- Cited by
- 97
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2025: 3 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 21 · 2019: 20 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 3
- FWCI
- 11.87
- Type
- book
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Oxford University Press eBooks (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Archeology (arts and humanities) › Archaeological and Geological Studies
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Archeology (arts and humanities) › Ancient and Medieval Archaeology Studies
- Social Sciences › Archeology › Archaeology and ancient environmental studies
- Keywords
- material change, prehistoric Britain, Neolithic, Early Bronze Age, pottery, metalwork, rock art, passage tombs, barrows, causewayed enclosures, prehistoric settlement, material performance, fragmentation, assembly
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review