The Meaning and Importance of the Lapita Face Motif

The principal design motifs characteristic of Lapita ceramic iconography are conventionally described as anthropomorphic both in appearance and in symbolic intent. Based on recent systematic research by a number of archaeologists, it is now possible to offer a more nuanced interpretation of the mean...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Archaeology and physical anthropology in Oceania 2009-07, Vol.44 (2), p.45-55
Hauptverfasser: Terrell, John Edward, Schechter, Esther M.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 55
container_issue 2
container_start_page 45
container_title Archaeology and physical anthropology in Oceania
container_volume 44
creator Terrell, John Edward
Schechter, Esther M.
description The principal design motifs characteristic of Lapita ceramic iconography are conventionally described as anthropomorphic both in appearance and in symbolic intent. Based on recent systematic research by a number of archaeologists, it is now possible to offer a more nuanced interpretation of the meaning and importance of this iconography to Pacific Islanders during and after the widespread popularity of Lapita as a pottery style. We argue that the most likely interpretation is that most but not all of the faces on Lapita vessels may be variant representations of sea turtles, not human beings. Furthermore, while this distinctive ware has been used to support broad inferences about the social organization, motivations, and religious ideas of its makers and users, Lapita designs may not be 'saying' symbolically what many now evidently believe them to be saying, and their historical importance may be other than what many currently say it is.
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>jstor_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_743792711</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><jstor_id>40387445</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>40387445</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-j841-38e6a8bf4fee01f982c6fe4efc443d94f04cda332a0880f6d175452c41f319a73</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNo9jk1LxDAURbtQcBz9CUI34qqQ5L026VIGRwc6zKb78kxftKVfJpmF_97CDK4u3HO43JtkI4SAzEgl75L7EHohZF5isUmg_ub0yDR101dKU5sexmX2kSbL6ezSuNKKli5Suqe1Os6xcw_JraMh8OM1t0m9f6t3H1l1ej_sXqusNygzMFyQ-XTomIV0pVG2cIzsLCK0JTqBtiUARcIY4YpW6hxzZVE6kCVp2CYvl9nFzz9nDrEZu2B5GGji-RwajaBLpaVczeerScHS4Px6vwvN4ruR_G-jpAZVCli9p4vXhzj7f44CjEbM4Q9WUVYU</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>743792711</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>The Meaning and Importance of the Lapita Face Motif</title><source>Jstor Complete Legacy</source><source>Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete</source><creator>Terrell, John Edward ; Schechter, Esther M.</creator><creatorcontrib>Terrell, John Edward ; Schechter, Esther M.</creatorcontrib><description>The principal design motifs characteristic of Lapita ceramic iconography are conventionally described as anthropomorphic both in appearance and in symbolic intent. Based on recent systematic research by a number of archaeologists, it is now possible to offer a more nuanced interpretation of the meaning and importance of this iconography to Pacific Islanders during and after the widespread popularity of Lapita as a pottery style. We argue that the most likely interpretation is that most but not all of the faces on Lapita vessels may be variant representations of sea turtles, not human beings. Furthermore, while this distinctive ware has been used to support broad inferences about the social organization, motivations, and religious ideas of its makers and users, Lapita designs may not be 'saying' symbolically what many now evidently believe them to be saying, and their historical importance may be other than what many currently say it is.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0003-8121</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Sydney: University of Sydney</publisher><subject>Anthropomorphism ; Archaeology ; Ceramics ; Ethnology and art ; Iconography ; Lapita ; Methodology and general studies ; Oceania ; Pacific Region ; Pottery ; Prehistory and protohistory ; Typology, technology and attribute analysis</subject><ispartof>Archaeology and physical anthropology in Oceania, 2009-07, Vol.44 (2), p.45-55</ispartof><rights>Copyright 2009 University of Sydney</rights><rights>2015 INIST-CNRS</rights><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/40387445$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/40387445$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,799,57992,58225</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&amp;idt=21732903$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Terrell, John Edward</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schechter, Esther M.</creatorcontrib><title>The Meaning and Importance of the Lapita Face Motif</title><title>Archaeology and physical anthropology in Oceania</title><description>The principal design motifs characteristic of Lapita ceramic iconography are conventionally described as anthropomorphic both in appearance and in symbolic intent. Based on recent systematic research by a number of archaeologists, it is now possible to offer a more nuanced interpretation of the meaning and importance of this iconography to Pacific Islanders during and after the widespread popularity of Lapita as a pottery style. We argue that the most likely interpretation is that most but not all of the faces on Lapita vessels may be variant representations of sea turtles, not human beings. Furthermore, while this distinctive ware has been used to support broad inferences about the social organization, motivations, and religious ideas of its makers and users, Lapita designs may not be 'saying' symbolically what many now evidently believe them to be saying, and their historical importance may be other than what many currently say it is.</description><subject>Anthropomorphism</subject><subject>Archaeology</subject><subject>Ceramics</subject><subject>Ethnology and art</subject><subject>Iconography</subject><subject>Lapita</subject><subject>Methodology and general studies</subject><subject>Oceania</subject><subject>Pacific Region</subject><subject>Pottery</subject><subject>Prehistory and protohistory</subject><subject>Typology, technology and attribute analysis</subject><issn>0003-8121</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2009</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNo9jk1LxDAURbtQcBz9CUI34qqQ5L026VIGRwc6zKb78kxftKVfJpmF_97CDK4u3HO43JtkI4SAzEgl75L7EHohZF5isUmg_ub0yDR101dKU5sexmX2kSbL6ezSuNKKli5Suqe1Os6xcw_JraMh8OM1t0m9f6t3H1l1ej_sXqusNygzMFyQ-XTomIV0pVG2cIzsLCK0JTqBtiUARcIY4YpW6hxzZVE6kCVp2CYvl9nFzz9nDrEZu2B5GGji-RwajaBLpaVczeerScHS4Px6vwvN4ruR_G-jpAZVCli9p4vXhzj7f44CjEbM4Q9WUVYU</recordid><startdate>20090701</startdate><enddate>20090701</enddate><creator>Terrell, John Edward</creator><creator>Schechter, Esther M.</creator><general>University of Sydney</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>JBE</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20090701</creationdate><title>The Meaning and Importance of the Lapita Face Motif</title><author>Terrell, John Edward ; Schechter, Esther M.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-j841-38e6a8bf4fee01f982c6fe4efc443d94f04cda332a0880f6d175452c41f319a73</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2009</creationdate><topic>Anthropomorphism</topic><topic>Archaeology</topic><topic>Ceramics</topic><topic>Ethnology and art</topic><topic>Iconography</topic><topic>Lapita</topic><topic>Methodology and general studies</topic><topic>Oceania</topic><topic>Pacific Region</topic><topic>Pottery</topic><topic>Prehistory and protohistory</topic><topic>Typology, technology and attribute analysis</topic><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Terrell, John Edward</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schechter, Esther M.</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><jtitle>Archaeology and physical anthropology in Oceania</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Terrell, John Edward</au><au>Schechter, Esther M.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>The Meaning and Importance of the Lapita Face Motif</atitle><jtitle>Archaeology and physical anthropology in Oceania</jtitle><date>2009-07-01</date><risdate>2009</risdate><volume>44</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>45</spage><epage>55</epage><pages>45-55</pages><issn>0003-8121</issn><abstract>The principal design motifs characteristic of Lapita ceramic iconography are conventionally described as anthropomorphic both in appearance and in symbolic intent. Based on recent systematic research by a number of archaeologists, it is now possible to offer a more nuanced interpretation of the meaning and importance of this iconography to Pacific Islanders during and after the widespread popularity of Lapita as a pottery style. We argue that the most likely interpretation is that most but not all of the faces on Lapita vessels may be variant representations of sea turtles, not human beings. Furthermore, while this distinctive ware has been used to support broad inferences about the social organization, motivations, and religious ideas of its makers and users, Lapita designs may not be 'saying' symbolically what many now evidently believe them to be saying, and their historical importance may be other than what many currently say it is.</abstract><cop>Sydney</cop><pub>University of Sydney</pub><tpages>11</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0003-8121
ispartof Archaeology and physical anthropology in Oceania, 2009-07, Vol.44 (2), p.45-55
issn 0003-8121
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_743792711
source Jstor Complete Legacy; Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete
subjects Anthropomorphism
Archaeology
Ceramics
Ethnology and art
Iconography
Lapita
Methodology and general studies
Oceania
Pacific Region
Pottery
Prehistory and protohistory
Typology, technology and attribute analysis
title The Meaning and Importance of the Lapita Face Motif
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-04T13%3A20%3A34IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=The%20Meaning%20and%20Importance%20of%20the%20Lapita%20Face%20Motif&rft.jtitle=Archaeology%20and%20physical%20anthropology%20in%20Oceania&rft.au=Terrell,%20John%20Edward&rft.date=2009-07-01&rft.volume=44&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=45&rft.epage=55&rft.pages=45-55&rft.issn=0003-8121&rft_id=info:doi/&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_proqu%3E40387445%3C/jstor_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=743792711&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_jstor_id=40387445&rfr_iscdi=true