Margins of the centre or critical peripheries?

Janz, Lisa; Conolly, James

doi:10.1080/00438243.2019.1729500

Cited by 2 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 41 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Hood & Olsen 1988;Jørgensen 2010;Kotivuori 2013;Sundquist 1999). Similar arguments have been put forward regarding metal objects found in other parts of the northern circumpolar area, such as in northern Siberia and Alaska/Canada (Cooper et al 2016;Dyakonov et al 2019;Janz & Conolly 2019). Our findings from the Sangis and Vivungi sites, however, fit poorly with these explanations as there seems to have been no preceding phase where metal objects were imported before the skills to produce and manufacture iron was acquired.…”

Section: Influence Of Long-standing European Viewssupporting

confidence: 79%

“…Bebermeier et al 2016; Gassmann & Schäfer 2018; Pleiner 2006). These views are further accentuated in relation to metallurgical remains in societies considered as of low complexity and peripheral (such as nomads, pastoralists and hunter-gatherers), where early prehistoric metals typically are regarded as anomalies (considered as imports) and continuously dismissed in iron research (Alpern 2005; Dyakonov et al 2019; Janz & Conolly 2019; Jørgensen 2011).…”

Section: Long-standing Views In European Iron Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Other recent literature that strives to reposition the Arctic north and which generally criticizes the dichotomic picture and asymmetrical relations/passive role typically ascribed to northern hunter-gatherers (Forsberg 2012; Janz & Conolly 1919; Kuusela 2020; Kuusela et al 2018; Melheim 2012; Ramqvist 2012), despite its general focus on the active role of local societies, is still locked in world system theory with a persistent focus on centre/periphery relations. There is further a persistent focus on bounded cultures/identities in much of this literature, where archaeological remains (according to typology and morphology) are assigned to different cultural groups and considered markers of ethnic identity.…”

Section: Influence Of Long-standing European Viewsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Towards a Broader Understanding of the Emergence of Iron Technology in Prehistoric Arctic Fennoscandia

Bennerhag¹,

Yamamoto²,

Söderholm³

2022

CAJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The article critically examines interpretations of Old World ferrous metallurgical developments with reference to their consequences for Arctic Fennoscandian iron research. The traditional paradigm of technological innovations recurrently links the emergence of iron technology to increasing social complexity and a sedentary agricultural lifestyle, typically downplaying ‘peripheral’ areas such as Arctic Fennoscandia and its hunter-gatherer communities. Even in postcolonial research of recent years, the archaeometallurgical record of Arctic Fennoscandia is interpreted and organized within the traditional frameworks on the time, course, and cultural context of the introduction of iron technology in Europe, where Arctic Fennoscandia is not considered to have any noteworthy role. However, current archaeological research with new data in Arctic Fennoscandia disputes prevailing ideas in European iron research and shows substantial evidence that iron technology was an integrated part of hunter-gatherer subsistence already during the Early Iron Age (c. 200 bc). Archaeometallurgical analyses reveal advanced knowledge in all the operational sequences of iron technology, including bloomery steel production and the mastering of advanced smithing techniques. Therefore, we urge dispensing with traditional ideas and call for an increased interest in the underlying mechanisms for the transfer of iron.

show abstract

Section: Influence Of Long-standing European Viewssupporting

confidence: 79%

Section: Long-standing Views In European Iron Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Influence Of Long-standing European Viewsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Towards a Broader Understanding of the Emergence of Iron Technology in Prehistoric Arctic Fennoscandia

Bennerhag¹,

Yamamoto²,

Söderholm³

2022

CAJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Along with stages of growth formulations or narratives, world systems theory, with its division of global economies into center and periphery—with regions beyond the periphery completely ignored—also distorts how we view societies (Janz and Conolly 2019). 7 In this view, Europe is generally the core, with trade routes of various kinds emanating outward to the periphery.…”

Section: Contextmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Country They Built: Dynamic and Complex Indigenous Economies in North America before 1492

Carlos¹

2023

J. Econ. Hist.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The economic history of the United States is that of Europeans and their institutions. Indigenous nations are absent. This absence is partly due to a lack of data but perhaps also to a perception that Indigenous communities contributed little to U.S. growth. Three case studies explore the economic complexity and social stratification across different nations/regions prior to contact. Migrants to the United States came not to an empty land but one with settled agriculture, complex production processes, and extensive trade relations, upon which Europeans built.

show abstract

Margins of the centre or critical peripheries?

Cited by 2 publications

References 41 publications

Towards a Broader Understanding of the Emergence of Iron Technology in Prehistoric Arctic Fennoscandia

Towards a Broader Understanding of the Emergence of Iron Technology in Prehistoric Arctic Fennoscandia

The Country They Built: Dynamic and Complex Indigenous Economies in North America before 1492

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About