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...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Archaeology and physical anthropology in Oceania 2009-07, Vol.44 (2), p.45-55 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , |
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&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 |