¿Demasiados Paisajes?: Múltiples teorías o múltiples subjetividades en la arqueología del paisaje.
Archivos
Fecha
2013
Autores
Título de la revista
ISSN de la revista
Título del volumen
Editor
Departamento de Arqueología, Escuela de Antropología, Facultad de Humanidades y Artes
Resumen
Descripción
Paisaje es uno de los conceptos más populares de la arqueología de los últimos 15 años y esta
popularidad ha llevado a múltiples entendimientos del paisaje y múltiples formas de abordar
y generar conocimiento sobre los paisajes pasados, muchas de ellas contradictorias entre sí.
Sin embargo, no todos los estudios espaciales pueden ser considerados arqueología del paisaje.
El concepto de paisaje difiere de, por ejemplo, los estudios de patrón de asentamiento o
la idea de uso del espacio. La arqueología del paisaje nació como una propuesta teórico-epistemológica
específica contrapuesta a las perspectivas formales, cartesianas y funcionalistas
sobre espacio, por lo que no deberíamos denominar arqueología del paisaje a estas maneras
de abordar las espacialidades pasadas. En este trabajo reclamo reenfocar la arqueología del
paisaje para volver a articularla con la genealogía teórica que le dio origen. Sumado a esto,
propongo repensar la manera en que generamos conocimiento e interpretaciones sobre los
paisajes abordando su estudio desde tres subjetividades: la de quienes lo construyeron y lo
vivieron en el pasado, la de nosotros, los arqueólogos, en el contexto del campo, y la de los
pobladores actuales y su capital cultural y el conocimiento práctico que les da el habitar en
las regiones que buscamos estudiar.
Landscape has become one of the most popular concepts in archaeology in the last 15 years. This popularity has produced multiple understandings of landscape and multiple ways to explore and to produce knowledge about past landscapes, many of which contradict each other. Nevertheless, not all spatial studies should be considered landscape archaeology. Landscape, as a concept, differs from, for instance, settlement pattern approaches or the idea of use of space. Landscape archaeology was born as a specific theoretical-epistemolo¬- gical approach opposed to formal, Cartesian, and functionalist perspectives on space and, therefore, we should not include within landscape archaeology those other ways of exploring past spatialities. In this paper I claim that we need to refocus landscape archaeology in order to rearticulate it with the theoretical genealogy that originated it. In addition, I suggest that we should rethink the way we generate knowledge and interpretations about landscapes by studying them from the point of view of three different subjectivities: that of those who built and inhabited them, our own subjectivity when we are in the field, and the subjectivity of contemporary local inhabitants and their cultural capital and practical knowledge they have as dwellers of the re¬gions that we seek to study.
Landscape has become one of the most popular concepts in archaeology in the last 15 years. This popularity has produced multiple understandings of landscape and multiple ways to explore and to produce knowledge about past landscapes, many of which contradict each other. Nevertheless, not all spatial studies should be considered landscape archaeology. Landscape, as a concept, differs from, for instance, settlement pattern approaches or the idea of use of space. Landscape archaeology was born as a specific theoretical-epistemolo¬- gical approach opposed to formal, Cartesian, and functionalist perspectives on space and, therefore, we should not include within landscape archaeology those other ways of exploring past spatialities. In this paper I claim that we need to refocus landscape archaeology in order to rearticulate it with the theoretical genealogy that originated it. In addition, I suggest that we should rethink the way we generate knowledge and interpretations about landscapes by studying them from the point of view of three different subjectivities: that of those who built and inhabited them, our own subjectivity when we are in the field, and the subjectivity of contemporary local inhabitants and their cultural capital and practical knowledge they have as dwellers of the re¬gions that we seek to study.
Palabras clave
Arqueología del paisaje, Genealogía teórica, Epistemología, Subjetividades