Abstract
Este artículo pretende responder al reciente trabajo de Michel Kazanski y Patrick Périn, que defiende la capacidad de la Arqueología para reconocer la identidad étnica en los registros funerarios altomedievales. Tras resumir las líneas principalesde su argumentación, somete a análisis cada postulado de sus hipótesis. Dicho análisis se basa en la evidencia arqueológica y en lo que ésta puede o no aportar, sin introducir preconcepciones extraidas de una lectura (generalmente anticuada) de las fuentes históricas. Tras encontrar el argumento deficiente, incluso en sus propios términos, el artículo concluye planteando la naturaleza de la etnicidad en sí misma, y si es verosímil que deje tan obvias y directas huellas en el registro arqueológico.
Highlights
Eggers (1950), which claimed to derive its strength from the avoidance of the ‘Mischargumentation’ which avowedly characterised earlier work
It allegedly treated the different bodies of evidence – historical, archaeological, linguistic or onomastic, etc. - separately and on their own terms
Kazanski and Périn conclude that it would be impossible to distinguish, archaeologically, a Barbarian who was perfectly integrated in Roman society or a Roman living in barbaricum and buried according to local practice
Summary
This article responds to recent work by Michel Kazanski and Patrick Périn, defending the ability of archaeology to recognise ethnic identity in the burial record of the early Middle Ages. Eggers (1950), which claimed to derive its strength from the avoidance of the ‘Mischargumentation’ (mixed argumentation) which avowedly characterised earlier work Instead, it allegedly treated the different bodies of evidence – historical, archaeological, linguistic or onomastic, etc. Kazanski and Périn argue that Kossinna's ideas had seen archaeological cultures as simple reflections of ethnic groups –equated with peoples or nations- in too monolithic a way. Their work, they state, is based on quite different premises. Kazanski and Périn conclude that it would be impossible to distinguish, archaeologically, a Barbarian who was perfectly integrated in Roman society or a Roman living in barbaricum and buried according to local practice
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
