In this introduction to the special edition, we argue that the theories of philosopher Charles Sanders Peirce have the potential to bridge some of the deepest divides in archaeology. We also demonstrate that the adoption of an extreme ‘anti-representational’ position in thing-centred turns in the discipline is misguided, as scholars recognize diverse modalities of representation beyond symbols and immaterial signifiers. By combining the insights of Peircean semiotics, assemblage theory, and new approaches inspired by the ontological turn, we rehabilitate representation as a fundamental material process in the exercise of agency and the making and transformation of ‘meaningfully constituted worlds.’ Mobilizing theories on semiotic ideologies in particular, we further contend that the material worlds assembled through representational processes can often be harmful, unjust, contradictory, challenged and potentially reconfigured. Ultimately, as a semiotic science in its own right, archaeology must devise new ways to analyse the mediated representations of the past subjects they study. The diverse articles of this issue have made an important contribution exploring this central problem in archaeological research.
CITATION STYLE
Swenson, E., & Cipolla, C. N. (2020). Representation and materiality in archaeology: A semiotic reconciliation. World Archaeology. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.1080/00438243.2021.1925582
Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.