The DOI matches its Crossref record.
The Archaeology of Personhood: An Anthropological Approach
Abstract
Bringing together a wealth of research in social and cultural anthropology, philosophy and related fields, this is the first book to address the contribution that an understanding of personhood can make to our interpretations of the past Applying an anthropological approach to detailed case studies from European prehistoric archaeology, the book explores the connection between people, animals, objects, their societies and environments and investigates the relationship that jointly produces bodies, persons, communities and artefacts. The Archaeology of Personhood examines the characteristics that define a person as a category of being, highlights how definitions of personhood are culturally variable and explores how that variation is connected to human uses of material culture.
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
“It may have been accompanied by a model of personhood which was situational or contextual, rather in the manner of so-called “Great Man” societies (Godelier and Strathern 1991): authority or capacity in one sphere of action did not necessarily convey power in other spheres (Fowler 2004; Robb and Harris 2018).”
From Art (Pre)History: Ritual, Narrative and Visual Culture in Neolithic and Bronze Age Europe (2020) · cites this paper as Fowler 2004
Citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Imagined Affordance: Reconstructing a Keyword for Communication Theory
Nagy, P., & Neff, G. (2015) · Social Media + Society · doi:10.1177/2056305115603385 · Cited by 909
Grand Challenges for Archaeology
Kintigh, K., Altschul, J. H., Beaudry, M. C., Drennan, R. D., Kinzig, A. P., Kohler, T. A., Limp, W. F., Maschner, H. D. G., Michener, W. K., Paüketat, T. R., et al. (2014) · American Antiquity · doi:10.7183/0002-7316.79.1.5 · Cited by 344
“References: Canuto and Yaeger (2000); Dietler and Herbich (1988); Fowler (2004); Inomata and Coben (2006); Jones (1996); Nielsen and Walker (2009).”
BackgroundNegotiating Authentic Objects and Authentic Selves
Jones, S. B. (2010) · Journal of Material Culture · doi:10.1177/1359183510364074 · Cited by 316
Alberti, B. (2016) · Annual Review of Anthropology · doi:10.1146/annurev-anthro-102215-095858 · Cited by 296
Animating Archaeology: Local Theories and Conceptually Open-ended Methodologies
Alberti, B., & Marshall, Y. (2009) · Cambridge Archaeological Journal · doi:10.1017/s0959774309000535 · Cited by 253
Metadata
- Authors
- Fowler, C.
- Corresponding author
- Fowler, Chris
- ORCID
- Fowler, Chris
- Venue
- Routledge eBooks
- Publisher
- Routledge
- Published
- 2004-08-02
- OpenAlex
- W4234116192
- Cited by
- 486
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 21 · 2025: 46 · 2024: 22 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 16 · 2021: 37 · 2020: 71 · 2019: 48 · 2018: 27 · 2017: 24 · 2016: 19 · 2015: 22 · 2014: 23 · 2013: 13 · 2012: 20
- FWCI
- 27.58
- Type
- book
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Routledge 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 › Arts and Humanities › History › Viking Age and Medieval Scandinavia
- Keywords
- personhood, material culture, human-animal relations, human-object relationship, social identity, cultural variation, community formation, human-environment relations, philosophy of personhood
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
