‘Circling the wagons’ and community formation: interpreting circular villages in the archaeological record

Rautman, Alison E.

doi:10.1080/00438243.2015.1101395

Cited by 3 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Certainly, a context of threat furnishes powerful incentives for cooperative action such as the building of fortifications (Ikehara 2016; Roscoe 2013). Defensive site plans in themselves reinforce solidarity: fortifications demarcate and define the social group of insiders versus outsiders (Kenzle 1997), as do circular villages, which Rautman (2016, 137) argues are the product of defensive aggregation, creating ‘a defined physical and social safe haven in an uncertain world’. Solidarity is also sustained by normative behaviours (Raffield et al 2016).…”

Section: Coalescence and Defensive Communitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The strength and solidarity of fortified communities were symbolized through constructed defences. Kinship organization might be spatialized in the layout of settlements (Ensor 2013), difference minimized or accentuated (Rautman 2016). Architecture impeded certain kinds of contact and facilitated others, shaping the daily flow of movement and knowledge (Moore 2003).…”

Section: Coalescence and Defensive Communitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Indeed, they are literally built in to the architectural fabric. Although some defensive site plans, such as circular villages with an internal plaza (Rautman 2016), ostensibly privilege no part of the resident population, others involve gradients of protection from the inner core to the outer fringes. Defensive settlements on hilltops or ridges, by their nature, contain more protected zones on the peak or the ridge-end and more vulnerable sides.…”

Section: Coalescence and Defensive Communitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Coalescence and Defensive Communities: Insights from an Andean Hillfort Town

Arkush

2017

CAJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Defensive and fortified settlements are often places of relatively dense nucleation by people with few viable alternatives, resulting in the imperative need to establish consensual rules for living together. What behaviours and attitudes were adopted in defensively nucleated places? Recent investigations at Ayawiri (Machu Llaqta), a densely settled hillfort town of the western Titicaca Basin of Peru inhabited c. ad 1300–1450, shed light on the nature of social life within the defensive community and the workings of social distinction, priority in settlement, conformity and publicity. I draw on the evidence from Ayawiri to discuss how defensive settlements create and reinforce certain ways of living by reformulating the basic logics of sociality and the material and spatial realms through which they work.

show abstract

Section: Coalescence and Defensive Communitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Coalescence and Defensive Communitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Coalescence and Defensive Communitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Coalescence and Defensive Communities: Insights from an Andean Hillfort Town

Arkush

2017

CAJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It is through the tensions of collaboration and conflict that cultural dynamics are most evident (Angelbeck ; Ikehara ; Raffield et al. ; Rautman ; Sharratt ). In “‘Circling the Wagons’ and Community Formation: Interpreting Circular Villages in the Archaeological Record,” Alison Rautman () suggests that the circular settlement pattern of Pueblo villages in Salinas Missions National Monument likely did reinforce inward‐focused corporate identities and collective action.…”

Section: Tensions Of Collaboration and Conflictmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…; Rautman ; Sharratt ). In “‘Circling the Wagons’ and Community Formation: Interpreting Circular Villages in the Archaeological Record,” Alison Rautman () suggests that the circular settlement pattern of Pueblo villages in Salinas Missions National Monument likely did reinforce inward‐focused corporate identities and collective action. Relations between the villagers were regulated, in part, by the contiguous, standardized rooms that were restricted in outward growth and hierarchical configuration.…”

Section: Tensions Of Collaboration and Conflictmentioning

confidence: 99%

Anthropological Archaeology in 2016: Cooperation and Collaborations in Archaeological Research and Practice

Halperin

2017

American Anthropologist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ideas of collaboration and cooperation are often implicit, taken-for-granted elements in archaeological models and theorizing. Overshadowed by a growing archaeological preoccupation with warfare, violence, conflict, and crisis, cooperative acts and collaborative dispositions appear to lack the same emotional resonance and changestimulating properties that attract archaeological attention. Nonetheless, many archaeological publications in 2016 directly take on notions of collaboration in thinking about the past and our roles as archaeologists and as citizens of the future. This review underscores the significance of thinking about collaboration and cooperation as ambiguous, ambivalent, multiscalar, and dynamic. At issue is not just the creation of community but also of getting things done and, of course, celebrating, revising, or reworking the intended or unintended consequences of those actions over the generations. [archaeology, collaboration, cooperation] RESUMEN Las ideas de colaboración y cooperación son a menudo elementos implícitos, que se dan por sentados en los modelos y teorización arqueológicos. Opacados por una creciente preocupación arqueológica por la guerra, la violencia, el conflicto, y la crisis, a los actos cooperativos y disposiciones colaborativas parecen faltarles la misma resonancia emocional y propiedades estimulantes de cambio que atraen la atención arqueológica. No obstante, muchas publicaciones arqueológicas en 2016 empiezan directamente a tratar las nociones de colaboración, reflexionando acerca del pasado y nuestros roles como arqueólogos y como ciudadanos del futuro. Esta revisión enfatiza la importancia de considerar la colaboración y cooperación como ambiguas, ambivalentes, de múltiples escalas, y dinámicas. En cuestión no sólo está la creación de comunidad, sino también el lograr que se hagan las cosas, y por supuesto, celebrar, revisar, o rehacer las consecuencias planeadas o no planeadas de esas acciones sobre generaciones. [arqueología, colaboración, cooperación]

show abstract

Ritual, Labor Mobilization, and Monumental Construction in Small-Scale Societies

Miller¹

2021

Current Anthropology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

‘Circling the wagons’ and community formation: interpreting circular villages in the archaeological record

Cited by 3 publications

References 25 publications

Coalescence and Defensive Communities: Insights from an Andean Hillfort Town

Coalescence and Defensive Communities: Insights from an Andean Hillfort Town

Anthropological Archaeology in 2016: Cooperation and Collaborations in Archaeological Research and Practice

Ritual, Labor Mobilization, and Monumental Construction in Small-Scale Societies

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About