Materiality, Technology, and Constructing Social Knowledge Through Bodily Representation: a View from Prehistoric Guernsey, Channel Islands

European Journal of Archaeology 17 (2) 2014, 248–263

Materiality, Technology, and Constructing Social Knowledge through Bodily Representation: A View from Prehistoric Guernsey, Channel Islands

SHEILA KOHRING Department of Archaeology and Anthropology, University of Cambridge, UK

The role of the human body in the creation of social knowledge—as an ontological and/or aesthetic category—has been applied across social theory. In all these approaches, the body is viewed as a locus for experience and knowledge. If the body is a source of subjective knowledge, then it can also become an important means of creating ontological categories of self and society. The materiality of human representations within art traditions, then, can be interpreted as providing a means for contextualizing and aestheticizing the body in order to produce a symbolic and structural knowledge category. This paper explores the effect of material choices and techniques of production when representing the human body on how societies order and categorize the world.

Keywords: materiality, body, representation, stone, Channel Islands

EVOKING THE BODY and experience to transfer anthropomorphic characteristics and actions onto The body as a category for the creation of physical objects. If we imbue objects with symbolic and structural, or ontological, anthropomorphic characteristics as part of knowledge within a given society has been the cognitive process, it does not seem a well discussed (e.g. Mauss, 1979; Turner, great leap to assume, as many do, that 1984; Laqueur, 1990; Schilling, 1993; these objects can exert some level of Csordas, 1994; Grosz, 1995; Boyer, 1996; agency within society (as discussed by Gilchrist, 2000; Smith, 2004; Nanoglou, Latour, 1991, 2005; Gell, 1998). Material 2009a). Thus, displaying the body seems a has its own agency (Ingold, 2007; see also very personal, emotive act. When we Tilley, 2004) and this agency, along with encounter it in representations, the body that of the producer(s), is materialized can evoke a privileged intimacy or intuitive during the production process. These rep- knowledge. Boyer (1996) argues that the resentations are not static and their agency body is an intuitive ontological category may be triggered depending on their phys- based on an experiential understanding of ical and social context. self that is projected outwards onto others The potency of the image rests in the and onto the physical and material world. materiality of the representation and Hence, it is a cognitive extension of self engagement with representations within

© European Association of Archaeologists 2014 DOI 10.1179/1461957114Y.0000000055 This license permits others to re-use, reproduce, re-distribute and/or build upon your work, including for commercial purposes, providing they acknowledge you as author, and attribute original publication to the journal. Downloaded fromManuscript https://www.cambridge.org/core received 14 August 2013,. IP address: 170.106.35.93, on 30 Sep 2021 at 04:17:58, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/termsaccepted 30 January 2014,. https://doi.org/10.1179/1461957114Y.0000000055 revised 13 January 2014 Kohring – Materiality, Technology, and Constructing Social Knowledge through Bodily Representation 249

social contexts. When the body is materia- ways. Two frameworks, in particular, may lized in representation, particular have pertinence and could be seen to structuring principles—or aesthetics— overlap in useful and positive ways: embo- affect choices about what material and diment and corporeality approaches. If we technologies are used to make these consider how the materiality of human images (see Nanoglou, 2009b). Aesthetics representations can alter perception of the and structuring principles here are con- socially meaningful body, we can use the flated somewhat, but are connected in the concept of somatic modes of attention to sense that they are inherently social, his- link between ontologies of self and the torical, and mediate relationships by world around the self (Csordas, 1993: expressing idealized principles and prac- 138). The concept of corporeal realism, or tices specific to society (Gell, 1998). a recognition of the body as a shared bio- Representation of the body, however, is logical and social basis through which we not enough. The body-as-knowledge experience the world, is helpful in priori- needs a social context of engagement to tizing the body as a fundamental building structure and frame it. By engaging with block through which knowledge is created representation, a sense of bodily technique as it accepts knowledge as built upon the and aesthetic emerges and the knowledge real and concrete body-in-the-world (see transmitted through the category of body Schilling, 1993, 2005: 12–13). As a start- is reinforced. These engagements are per- ing premise, corporeal realism provides a formed and enacted within social framework on which we can consider how communities that provide the framework physical representations of the body might for understanding and making both be one way in which societies and com- actions and images meaningful. Continued munities materialize basic social categories engagement with body representations and ontological structures. within their socially appropriate contexts The basic premise for this interpretative provides meaning to the body. Engage- article arises from the belief that techno- ment defines what is an appropriate, logical practices are an embodied way that essential, and ideal socialized body within people create their physical world and that that society. New practices may emerge the human–material–technological and rework the materialized body, but the relationship is indivisible (Latour, 1991, images continue to shape social knowledge 2002; Ingold, 2000). I argue that there is until they are dispossessed and forgotten. a dialectic relationship between the way Understanding knowledge systems the body is materially produced and the through past representations is first and way the body itself is experienced and con- foremost influenced by our own aesthetic ceptualized. As such, the choices in the of body categories and what they mean to material used (stone, clay, bone), the tech- us. But, through contextualizing represen- niques employed in the production tations—not as self-evident and static (painting, incising, chipping) and the idealized forms, but as active agents in setting in which the finished object resides knowledge construction—they materialize (size and accessibility) all reflect percep- ontological categories of the past society. tions of the human body as an ontological This materialization can be explored category within a society. This paper through technology, technique, associated explores the construction of body images practices, and performances. Approaching in terms of material, technology, and this through appropriate theoretical frame- context. It draws upon three examples works, however, can be achieved in various from the island of Guernsey in the

Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 170.106.35.93, on 30 Sep 2021 at 04:17:58, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1179/1461957114Y.0000000055 250 European Journal of Archaeology 17 (2) 2014

Channel Islands (United Kingdom), but is and occupation on Guernsey spanning not necessarily exclusive to these examples, from the Palaeolithic to the present (see and the material and techniques utilized in Sebire, 2005, for an overview). Approxi- the production of the bodily images dis- mately thirty miles northeast of the cussed were widespread across the French coastline, the community was, by continent and spanned from the Neolithic the Neolithic, linked into social networks well into the Iron Age. The recurrence of spanning the western European Atlantic material and techniques used to create fringe. This connection is evidenced by material bodies demonstrates the solidity the shared burial traditions and use of of these concepts as building blocks for communal chambered tombs such as Le social knowledge systems. Varde, Le Fouillages, and Le Creux és Faïes and by settlements with similar lithic and pottery traditions such as those found MAKING STONE BODIES:THE CASE FOR recently at Camp Varouf (Garrow & STELAE IN PREHISTORIC GUERNSEY Sturt, in press) and the airport site (de Jersey, personal communication, 2012). The small island of Guernsey lies off the While settlement and monumental Breton coast of France and is the second tomb structures tell a story of life and largest island in the Channel Islands death on the island, the standing stones (Figure 1). Physically separated from the that remain scattered across the island continent since the Mesolithic period, the provide another aspect to understanding island was not, however, socially isolated community, identity, and society. In par- and there is evidence of human activity ticular, several of these standing stones

Figure 1. Map of Guernsey, Channel Islands and the location of the three images discussed in the text. Map: K. Boulden and S. Kohring.

Figure 2. The three bodily images discussed in the text. From left to right: the statue-menhir at Câtel Church, the Déhus chambered tomb and gardien, and the statue-menhir at St. Martin’s Church. Photos: S. Kohring.

have been shaped into or decorated with have been moved (both statue-menhirs in anthropomorphic features. Not only can this study were re-erected in their current the human representations provide insight location during the nineteenth century), into island identity (Kohring, 2013), but and the presence of fragmented statue- their physical presence can tell us about menhirs, standing stones and megalithic the prehistoric communities’ use of the burial monuments reminds us that other body as an ontological category. images may have been integral to the pre- Three surviving human representations historic social landscape but have provide the clearest evidence for thinking disappeared over time. about how their materiality and techniques For this paper, I want to explore only of production would have influenced the three ways by which ontological knowl- way the body was socially categorized by edge is constructed through human the prehistoric communities of Guernsey. representation: through choices in These comprise the statue-menhir in material, techniques of production and in Câtel churchyard, the engraved imaged of the setting, or context, of engagement. the Gardien du Tombeau on the second Some of these choices reflect local knowl- capstone of Le Déhus chambered tomb, edge traditions specific to Guernsey, and the statue-menhir at St. Martin’s although most can be extended to tra- Church (Figure 2). While these represen- ditions of producing and using human tations are scattered across the island, this body representations that existed in does not necessarily reflect their patterning general from the fourth millennium BC to in prehistory as the statue-menhirs may the first millennium BC along the western

Atlantic European fringe.1 The human as a material of choice for human rep- representations on Guernsey overlap and resentation. In this sense, the use of stone diverge in a range of ways across their acts as a baseline for human representation materiality, production technique and on the island. Furthermore, the use of setting, and all incorporate both local stone panels for rock art and anthropo- practices and wider cultural aesthetics morphic stelae and statue-menhirs across about the body. These points of intersec- Europe from the Neolithic to the Iron tion and divergence, however, warrant Age suggests that stone as a medium for closer attention, and although they are dif- human representation had a long history ficult to disentangle I have tried to and wide distribution (see edited volumes consider the influence of aesthetics and by Casini et al., 1995, and Casini & ontological knowledge exerted during two Fossati, 2004, for examples, and Robb, different stages of the figures’ life biogra- 2009, for an overview). phies: production and interaction. In While weight and transport logistics terms of production, I will look at the surely affected choices regarding materials, material and techniques used to create the prehistoric population on Guernsey, as images and how these exerted particular all the communities along the west Atlan- agencies in the creation of a particular tic fringe of Europe, were adept in the kind of image. After the production of the working and movement of megalithic material body, the agency of these rep- stone. Stone’s integration as a fundamental resentations may have become even more architectural element in tombs, as mega- affective in shaping body ontologies; they lithic markers in the landscape and as were the means by which members of the parts of ritual landscapes was common society understood the human form, and throughout the Neolithic. As an integral they continue to provide this meaning as part of constructed life, stone would have they influence the way further future had great symbolic potential. While the images of the body are produced. In this use of stone as a symbol of duration and framework, I will consider the importance permanence is commonly associated with of setting and context in the past and over megalithic constructions and stelae/menhir time. representations, other qualities may have been more significant in prehistoric knowledge systems, and certainly the per- MATERIALS manence of stone itself can be questioned. Colour, texture, and natural shape have The use of stone is the starting point for more recently been considered when dis- all three bodily representations in the cussing the symbolic importance of stones Guernsey case study. While other media in these constructions during prehistory may have been utilized in the past and lost (e.g. Jones, 1999; Tilley, 2004; Scarre, to current consideration, this does not 2010). On Guernsey, for example, Bukach negate or reduce the significance of stone (2003) found that Neolithic tomb construction integrated material from specific 1The chronology for these figures has been left very general due and different stone outcrops on the island. to the difficulty of dating them, as all their original contexts are Bukach’s (2003) analysis demonstrates that unknown. However, the Déhus chambered tomb’s early use has been dated between 4100 and 3900 BC, which gives us a date logistical and functional features of to contextualize the gardien on the capstone (see Schulting material were not the only factors con- et al., 2010). Stylistically, the statue-menhirs conform to conti- nental French traditions, dated generally to the fourth and third sidered in the choice of stone, but that millennia BC (De Guérin, 1920, and see Robb, 2009). local knowledge was materialized through

Figure 3. Close-up of stone surfaces. Left—the Gardien du Tombeau; right—the Câtel statue-menhir.

many potential features of material. In of primary or later production and inter- most examples, however, different qualities actions. Furthermore, touch and certain of stone have been discussed for mega- types of engagement (potentially rubbing, lithic constructions or rock art rather than painting or dressing of the statue-menhirs) as stone used to represent the body. would also have affected their smoothness Looking at the stone representations on and feel. Nevertheless, the coarseness and Guernsey as an example, all three make temperature of the stone would have pro- use of the local gneisses and granites. vided a comparative framework for the While trying to locate their precise origins biological body. may be an interesting avenue for future The Déhus figure would also have been work, I wish to focus on the textural prop- evocative in a different way. The figure erties of the stone material used for the existed as a menhir prior to its inclusion in Guernsey representations. What is striking the Le Déhus chambered tomb and, as about these images and their materiality is such, it would have been as accessible as the rough surface of the stone (Figure 3). both statue-menhirs, although—as a two- Engagement with the stone surface, par- dimensional figure—its experiencing ticularly through touch, would have would have been different. In its final shaped the comparison with the biological location as a tomb capstone, visual deli- body—either as a contrast or as part of a neation would have been extremely continuum. The statue-menhir forms, in difficult and perhaps simply knowing the particular, would have lent themselves to image was present was sufficient for its touch, as suggested by their three- social meaning. However, the granular dimensional carving, life size appearance, surface of the menhir/capstone—along and potential for public access. When with its production technique and setting originally constructed, these figures would —suggest touch would have been the have been finished and, in all probability, most suitable means of knowing the much smoother to the touch. Unfortu- figure, as it is the easiest way to differen- nately, reworking has made it difficult to tiate the concavities of the carving from determine if smoother areas are the result that of the unworked stone. Thus, the

individual experiencing the figure’s face This short-hand arguably transcended the when in the tomb would have been Guernsey community. Recurrent bodily further constrained in terms of physical images that are marked by vague facial engagement by setting and other practices definition and bodily appendages, while conducted in the tomb. Touch, however, emphasizing body features such as breasts would have been an important way to or particular material objects such as experience the figure once in the tomb. necklaces, head pieces, and weaponry, are This would have been a much more per- found in roughly similar forms on many sonal and intimate tactile experience in statue-menhirs across Europe during this comparison to the statue-menhirs both time (e.g. De Guérin, 1920; Kinnes, because of the focus on the face and 1981, 1995; Casini & Fossati, 2004; because the dimensionality and setting Robb, 2009) and suggest widespread would have restricted other senses. The social and gender categories may have rough stone would have provided a strong been an important aspect materialized sensory engagement for constructing the through bodily imagery. symbolic and comparative nature of the Returning to the baseline of corporeal stone bodies: visually seen as bodies but realism and embodiment, Turner (1984) texturally different or ‘other’. also emphasized the importance of the The coarse nature of the Guernsey body as an epistemic as well as an onto- granite makes it difficult, but certainly logical focal point for the construction of not impossible, to create fine detail. For meaning. If we consider how the body is example, the St. Martin statue-menhir is conceptualized as a social entity within a the most elaborately detailed of the society, across Europe we see similar figures, demonstrating that details can be trends in de-emphasizing individuality or achieved, although this is due to the in the use of short-hand bodily features reworking of the statue-menhir into a regardless of stone material (see Robb, more tabular and deeply engraved figure 2009, for a recent overview on regional during the Iron Age or Roman period styles). The use of roughly shaped, large (Kinnes, 1981). During the Neolithic and stones for the presentation of the human Copper Age, however, other types of form provides comparability in terms of stone and techniques were known in size and shape for the statue menhirs. In western Europe and combined to create some instances, anthropomorphically much more tabular forms with finer shaped stones have been noted in mega- details (see d’Anna, 1977; Gallay, 1995; lithic tombs (L’Helgouac’h, 1997; Le Pedrotti, 1995). In Guernsey, the making Roux, 1998; Scarre, 2009); in particular, of their statue-menhirs and the Déhus the capstone with the Déhus figure has figure was potentially constrained by pro- been noted as being roughly anthropo- ducers’ technological knowledge or morphic in shape (Kinnes, 1981). makers may have chosen to represent in In the examples on Guernsey, the two local stone, using particular techniques of statue menhirs vary in height and size but production, in order to create a specific retain an element of ‘life-size’ comparabil- local bodily aesthetic in which image ity. Standing at 1.60 m above ground detail was left vague and individuality (although the stone is embedded up to 30 ambiguous. By defining only certain fea- cm further into the ground: Kinnes, 1981: tures of the physical body, the producers 12), the Câtel statue-menhir is approxi- created a shorthand for a bodily categoriz- mately life-size in comparison to the ation that de-emphasized individuality. modern female body. While the modern

female body does not provide intuitive TECHNIQUE insight into past bodies or body categorization, it does provide a baseline. Two related technologies are most appar- Furthermore, according to general stature ent in the production of these images: that data from Neolithic and Bronze Age of shaping, or dressing, the stone to create Britain, height may have typically varied figures in the round and that of pecking or between 1.57 and 1.72 m for males and grinding of the surface to produce shallow females during these periods (Roberts & impressions in the stone (Figure 4). These Cox, 2007). Likewise, the St. Martin’s are not the only techniques available for statue-menhir currently stands at 1.65 m working stone during the Neolithic and above the current paved surface in which Copper Age and other techniques were she is embedded, although its original utilized along the Atlantic coast of Europe height may have been similar to Câtel if during these periods. For example, the they were contemporaneous. It is likely, painted human images associated with then, that natural stones were selected Levantine rock art in eastern and southern because of their size and perhaps their Iberia during the early Neolithic provide a anthropomorphic form or potential. We very different kind of bodily representation can see this more clearly in the Déhus on rock faces during the Neolithic (see figure. The shape of the menhir/capstone Domingo Sanz, 2006). These figures are on which the figure is pecked, as typically shown in profile and are often previously mentioned, is vaguely anthro- shown in movement or performing activi- pomorphic although it is not (in contrast ties such as hunting or collecting. They to the other two statue-menhirs) life-size, are often associated with other bodies, as the maximum height upright as a including human and animal forms, standing stone is 4.2 m (Kinnes, 1981: within the same or nearby compositions 12). Similarly, if considering only the rep- on the same stone panel. While the early resentation, the face is approximately 50 Neolithic painted images of the Iberian cm from browridge to the bottom of the Peninsula, like the Neolithic images on beard and approximately 40 cm from side Guernsey, show little detail regarding to side—substantially larger than a com- overall features of individuals, the tech- parable human figure. It appears that the nique of painting facilitated a more Déhus representation is materializing a dynamic and compositional approach to different kind of body image and knowl- defining the bodies and humans rep- edge. In both forms of body knowledge, resented. In comparison, the grinding and however, the general stone material used pecking techniques used by the stone (or seems to be an important starting point body) workers on Guernsey facilitated dis- and the natural form of the material— crete but unidentifiable bodily forms. being vaguely or socially seen as anthropo- These techniques linked the Guernsey morphic—an important or even the most community to wider French Atlantic tra- important factor in the selection of ditions that had their own variations, but material. Hence, highly detailed represen- similarly utilized coarse stone to facilitate tation may have been unnecessary and, in vagueness in feature definition and fact, the ambiguity created by the coarse emphasized particular features when defin- material and natural shape of the original ing the body aesthetic (Kinnes, 1995). stone itself could have affected the sym- The materiality of the granites and bolic meanings attached to these stone gneisses local to Guernsey may not be bodies. conducive to finely detailed painted action

Figure 4. Examples of dressing and pecking techniques used to create anthropomorphic attributes. Left to right: Câtel statue-menhir, Déhus figure, St. Martin’s statue-menhir.

scenes, but the use of paint is not pre- both producing shallow demarcation of cluded. Colour is an important aspect to most characteristic details and a reliance consider, either as added during pro- on particular key bodily features. One key duction or in terms of the stone itself. feature, which is emphasized very differ- While there is no indication of painting ently in the two images, is that of the face. on the surface of the images, feldspar, part In the case of the Câtel statue-menhir, the of the island’s mineralogy, may have given face is left purposefully flat and featureless some freshly dressed stone a slightly pink with only the head being delineated by its colouration. However, increasing separation from the shoulders and a band re-evaluation of megalithic art in Iberia encircling the top of the head. This is the and France indicates that painting was ‘classic’ representational style for statue- more commonly used alongside engraving menhirs in the wider French Atlantic and pecking techniques than previously region and implies a shared aesthetic thought (e.g. recent work at Barnenez: regarding the construction of these figures Bueno Ramírez et al., 2012). Producing (see Kinnes, 1995; Kohring, 2013). It is bodies in particular media in combination possible that paint, dress, or masks could with particular technologies, such as pri- have been used in combination with the marily pecking and grinding, meant detail static body in order to make the figure was shallowly ascribed on the body and more contextually dynamic, but if these the imagery produced was static in its techniques and materials were used they presentation of the ideal social body or have left no evidence. Importantly, the body aesthetic. Câtel statue-menhir and similar French Looking at the surviving Neolithic statue-menhirs were shaped in order to images of the Câtel statue-menhir and the emphasize bodily features by standing out Déhus gardien, we have two very different against the backdrop of the stone body. images produced from similar techniques, These include the head, neck, and breasts,

although other features are marked very figure, would have been difficult to access generally, such as the shoulders, arms, and in any other sensory way. However, even back. In contrast, the Déhus figure’s if the figure had been primarily engaged primary bodily reference point is the face. with as a standing menhir prior to its Shallow pecking and grinding techniques inclusion in the tomb, the size and created contoured features, such as the shallow pecking techniques may have been brow ridge, eyes, mouth, and beard, which even more difficult to interact with. Touch were only approximately 0.3 cm in depth was certainly still important, but it would (Kinnes, 1981: 12). Arms and a bow were have been fundamentally different than again loosely associated with this form, that of the two statue-menhirs. The relief but it was the face that dominated the techniques of Câtel may also prioritize panel in its final, and probably earlier, touch as a primary means of engagement. contexts. Thus, it appears that only par- In this instance, it may be the prominence ticular features of the body were of certain features acting as mnemonics for intentionally produced and this suggests body narratives. By touch, you would their fundamental role in categorization of firstly know that the image was a ‘body’ the body as a source of knowledge. through the emphasis on the torso or the Finally, the techniques of pecking and face. Based on the prioritized features, grinding may have created a sense of tem- individuals could then attach appropriate poral knowledge of the body. The act of social categories to these images, aiding in grinding and pecking would have had a shaping the practices and contexts of different temporality, compared with tech- engagement within their social setting. niques such as painting, in the chaîne Over time, new technological traditions opératoire of producing these bodies. The and practices emerge. A different type of producer(s) would have had to spend time deeply applied relief technique was used to slowly grinding away stone to expose the rework the St. Martin’s statue-menhir, social body within it. If we consider how compared to those employed earlier in the knowledge becomes attached to body cat- Neolithic. The technique of deeper egories, we can consider that ideas of incision of motifs allowed for greater defi- ‘making the body’ may have resulted in a nitions of lines, and the creation of detail comparable idea regarding the time is clearly demonstrated in the St. Martin required to make an appropriate human figure’s hairstyle and elaborate cloak. body as well. The social body was to be These new stoneworking techniques may moulded, touched and taught to be have required different tools and they defi- human—potentially, both in flesh or in nitely require different body techniques for stone. Hence, physical making, practice, their production. Metal, or hard chisels, and engagement with stone bodies provided would be required to create a deeper and a sense of making human bodies as well. finer cut into the granite stone. The body More generally, the shallow nature of of the producer would have had to be bodily attributes structuring the bodily positioned differently than with the earlier knowledge of Câtel and Déhus, and their technical practices of the Neolithic. slightly fuzzy boundaries, may have Hence, compared to these earlier pro- encouraged tactile engagement with the duction techniques, the producer(s) of the bodily images. The shallow concavity of reworked St. Martin’s statue-menhir the Déhus image, combined with the would have had a different techniques du restricted setting in its final context, which corps, or bodily movement, than the orig- requires artificial light for viewing the inal imaginer of the figure. Thus, making

the new St. Martin’s statue-menhir accen- to move the Déhus stone from an upright tuated the body of the producer in a standing stone to an architectural feature different way than that of their ancestors. is not an uncommon practice, but it does On the other hand, the action of produ- suggest that the stone and/or image was of cing different bodily details in the particular significance. That is not to say reworked figure suggests that a new bodily that both statue-menhirs would have been experience and knowledge system was moveable without group coordination, as already being established. their weight is a significant contrast in relation to their (approximately) human heights (see also Robb, 2009). The fact SETTING that movement of these images would have required community (perhaps even Techniques and material, combined with a several communities) coordination may sense of embodiment and corporeal have been a rationale for their movement realism, create a particular aesthetic of the or alteration in the past. In fact, in all body and materialize a shared social three Guernsey cases, we know that all meaning through the body. The social these stone images have been moved. The context for human representation accentu- Déhus gardien was produced on the stone ates the symbolic significance of bodies by surface of the capstone prior to its inte- framing the types of engagements possible gration into the tomb architecture during between biological and material bodies. the Neolithic, and both statue-menhirs Settings are not, however, separate from were buried or integrated into existing material and technology as often the architecture before being re-erected in choices made during production affect the nearby churchyards in more recent history. possibility of setting and presentation. For The context of the Déhus figure is example, the production in stone, perhaps equally striking in the constrained especially in large blocks, affects the mobi- manner in which it had to be engaged lity of all three Guernsey representations. with by the producing and later Guernsey The Déhus figure’s final context is population. While it could be argued that perhaps the most restricted setting in this the change in setting suggests disuse or sense. The chambers are now covered by a destruction of the figure’s meaning, I restored large circular earthen mound and would argue the opposite. Once in its kerbstone construction. In the interior, location in the Déhus chambered tomb, there is a passage and large central the gardien’s was an affective presence, chamber with four to six side chambers. shaping the experience of visitors to the When first excavated in the nineteenth tomb during the interment of the dead by century, the chambers were recorded as engaging the senses in very specific ways. filled with limpet shells covering human Touch would have been important and it bone and pottery (Sebire, 2005; Schulting may be one reason why facial features were et al., 2010). The image itself is located used to create body knowledge in this on the second to last capstone in the main instance. In considering how individuals chamber of the tomb and was part of the read social context in meaningful ways, original structure. The weight of the stone Goffman (1963: 89) has emphasized the would have made moving this image or importance of the face in signalling changing the mode of engagement with it ‘mutual activity’, which provides a social a very difficult and elaborate community context for interaction across social sta- event. The fact that the community chose tuses and positions. While Goffman

(1963) emphasizes verbal communication more public and others more private. If we and facial engagement, I believe that the presume we can read some sort of engen- corporeality of faces in culturally charged dering of these figures, then it media, such as stone in the Guernsey demonstrates that our common duality examples, would also evoke bodily knowl- between male/female and public/private is edge and symbolism and further suggests not static structural knowledge categories. the image was integrated there with delib- Laqueur’s (1990) history of sex is a clear erate intention. Knowing, through reminder that there is no essentialized touching the face of the gardien, would meaning or duality between sexes and, for have recreated an intimate power relation- that matter, gender, and that these ontolo- ship between human and stone. The gies change over time. The change in liminality of the setting and the intimacy imagery of the St. Martin statue-menhir of the engagement suggests that the and the setting of the Déhus menhir/cap- gardien had an important role spanning stone may be taken as examples of between the living bodies and the dead as changing gender, as well as body, cat- mediated through the stone image. egories over time. If we think about the bodily categoriz- A final consideration of setting can be ation of gender in reference to the three discussed in terms of temporality. While images, setting reinforces technical, and the current surface of the Câtel statue- representational styles. The difference in menhir is the result of many years of use, setting between the Déhus gardien and re-use, and wear on these stone images, it the two statue-menhirs suggests that some reminds us that stone is a dynamic sort of gendered division may be being medium with its own agency (Ingold, expressed. Different kinds of body images 2007). The material agency, or perhaps and knowledges, which may have to do more appropriately in this sense the cor- with sex or gender, were potentially used poreality, of the representation in stone for different social settings. While we continues to be expressed once established cannot assume open access for the statue- in its social setting. Changes due to menhirs, their size, shaping, and rediscov- reworking or weathering may have been ery in open or social contexts suggest they linked to ideas about the human lifecycle. would have played a more public role in If we compare the two female gendered prehistoric society. The gardien, com- (by our standards) statue-menhirs of Câtel monly referred to as male—although this and St. Martin, their setting and context is due to our own reading of material may have been a further contributing associations and facial features—appears in factor to the process of aging that would this final setting to be more private or have slowly occurred over time. As the restricted in its access. As a note on our Câtel statue-menhir currently stands, the ascription of gender associations, it is material properties of the stone give it a interesting that when the gardien was first very grey appearance and the coarse grain rediscovered, it was compared to the Câtel makes boundary lines blurry. If the statue- and St. Martin statue-menhirs and dis- menhir had originally or often been set in cussed in female terms (see De Guérin, open contexts and exposed to the 1920). What is evident is that different elements, it is very likely that this process bodies, emphasizing different bodily would have started fairly early in its life characteristic and material associations, biography. In comparison, the explicit were made differently and situated in reworking of the St. Martin’s statue-menhir different social contexts—some potentially reflects the need or desire to rejuvenate and

provide a new social status to this image; in life biography. Corporeal realism and embo- essence, re-birthing a new body concept diment theories provide a link between the and knowledge through appropriation of use of the body and the creation of onto- the public, and aged, ancestor. logical categories and knowledge of the world. In effect, understanding the materiality and techniques of imagery allow us CONCLUSIONS:MAKING insight into the aesthetic categorization of the body in prehistoric Guernsey society. When we look at a Renaissance painting we idealize the bodies and attach particular aesthetic qualities and symbolic meanings REFERENCES to them. Even after body images start to change, these aesthetics and symbolic Boyer, P. 1996. What Makes meanings surrounding the body often Anthropomorphism Natural: Intuitive persist within social knowledge structures. Ontology and Cultural Representations. A scan of the internet for ‘Botticelli’ makes Journal of the Royal Anthropological – it quickly apparent that the bodily imagery Institute, n.s. 2:1 15. this invokes remains a positive ideal. Botti- Bueno Ramírez, P., de Balbín Behrmann, R., Laporte, L., Bouezin, P., Barroso celli may have been materializing a body Bermejo, R., Hernanz Gismero, A., image relevant to his time, but the persist- Gavira-Vallejo, J. & Iriarte Cela, M. ence of the symbolic aesthetic of beauty 2012. Paintings in Atlantic Megalithic built around the female form continues to Art: Barnenez. Trabajos de Prehistoria,69 – inform present knowledge even though the (1):123 32. Bukach, D. 2003. Exploring Identity and body image has changed. One reason for Place: An Analysis of the Provenance of this is that the representation, or art, per- Passage Grave Stones on Guernsey and sists beyond its originator and continues to Jersey in the Middle Neolithic. Oxford exert its agency within society (Gell, Journal of Archaeology, 22(1):23–33. 1998). Human representations in material Casini, S., de Marinis, R.C. & Pedrotti, A. 1995. Statue-Stele e massi Incisi nell’Europa form can persist within social contexts and dell’Età del Rame. Notizie Archaeologiche shape social ontologies by providing Bergomensi 3. Bergamo: Civico Museo anchors for categorical knowledge. Archaelogico. The figures I discuss here are not meant Casini, S. & Fossati, A. 2004. La Pietre degli ’ to provide a comprehensive picture, but, Dei: Statue-Stele dell Età del Rame in — Europa — lo Stato della Ricerca. Notizie rather, to provide insight especially when Archaeologiche Bergomensi 12. Bergamo: contextualized within shared European Civico Museo Archeologico. representational traditions during prehis- Csordas, T.J. 1993. Somatic Modes of Attention. tory—into how Neolithic and Bronze Age Cultural Anthropology, 8(2):135–56. bodies were constructed and used. It also Csordas, T.J. 1994. Introduction: The Body as allows us to question how representing the Representation and Being-in-the-World. — In: T.J. Csordas, ed. Embodiment and body in particular media in this case Experience: The Existential Ground of stone—may have shaped past societies’ Culture and Self. Cambridge: Cambridge views on the body by creating associated University Press, pp. 1–24. knowledge around peoples’ place in the d’Anna, A. 1977. Les statues-menhirs et steles world,thepermanenceorephemeralityof anthropomorphes du midi méditerranéen. Paris: Centre National de la Recherche the body, the discreteness or fluidity of the Scientifique. body, and the ability of the body to be De Guérin, T.W.M. 1920. Notes on the reworked and re-symbolized throughout its Recent Discovery of a Human

Figure Sculptured on a Capstone of the Notizie Archeologiche Bergomensi 3. Dolmen of Déhus, Guernsey. Man, Bergamo: Civico Museo Archeologico, pp. 20:129–34. 131–41. Domingo Sanz, I. 2006. La figura humana, Kohring, S. 2013. Stepping Stones: Art and paradigma de continuidad y cambio en el Community on Prehistoric Guernsey, arte rupestre Levantino. Archivo de Channel Islands. Journal of World Art,3 Prehistoria Levantina, 26:161–91. (2):297–318. Gallay, A. 1995. Les stele anthropomorphes Laqueur, T. 1990. Making Sex: Body and du site mégalithique du Petit-Chasseur à Gender from the Greeks to Freud. Sion (Valais, Suisse). In: S. Casini, R. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. C. de Marinis & A. Pedrotti, eds. Latour, B. 1991. Technology is Society Made Statue-stele e Massi Incisi nell’Europa Durable. In: J. Law, ed. A Sociology of dell’Età del Rame. Notizie Archeologiche Monsters: Essays on Power, Technology and Bergomensi 3. Bergamo: Civico Museo Domination. London: Routledge, Archeologico, pp. 167–94. pp. 103–31. Garrow, D. & Sturt, F. in press. The Latour, B. 2002. Morality and Technology: Mesolithic-Neolithic Transition in the The Ends of the Means. Trans. C. Venn. Channel Islands: Maritime and Terrestrial Theory, Culture & Society, 19(5/6):247– Perspectives. In: T. Darvill & 60. A. Sheridan, eds. Hands Across the Water: Latour, B. 2005. Reassembling the Social: An The Archaeology of the Cross-Channel Introduction to Actor-Network-Theory. Neolithic. London: British Academy. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Gell, A. 1998. Art and Agency: Towards a New Le Roux, C.-T. 1998. Du menhir à la statue Anthropological Theory. Oxford: Clarendon dans le mégalithisme armoricain. In: Press. J. Guilaine, ed. Actes du 2ème Colloque Gilchrist, R. 2000. Unsexing the Body: The International sur la Statuaire Mégalithique, Interior Sexuality of Medieval Religious Saint-Pons-de-Thommières du 10 au 14 Women. In: R. Schmidt & B. Voss, eds. septembre 1997. Archéologie en Languedoc Archaeologies of Sexuality. London: 22, pp. 217–35 Routledge, pp. 89–103. L’Helgouac’h, J. 1997. De la lumière au Goffman, E. 1963. Behavior in Public Places: ténèbres. In: J. L’Helgouac’h, C.-T. Le Notes on the Social Organization of Roux & J. Lecornec, eds. Art et Symboles Gatherings. New York: The Free Press. du Mégalithisme Européen. Actes du 2ème Grosz, E. 1995. Space, Time, and Perversion: Colloque International sur l’Art Essays on the Politics of Bodies. London: Mégalithique, Nantes 1995. Revue Routledge. Archéologique de l’Ouest, supplément 8. Ingold, T. 2000. Making Culture and Rennes: Association pour la Diffusion des Weaving the World. In: P.M. Graves- Recherches Archéologiques dans l’Ouest Brown, ed. Matter, Materiality and de la France, pp. 107–23. Modern Culture. London: Routledge, pp. Mauss, M. 1979. The Notion of Body 50–71. Techniques. In: Sociology and Psychology: Ingold, T. 2007. Materials Against Materiality. Essays by Marcel Mauss. Trans. Archaeological Dialogues,14(1):1–16. Brewster. B. London: Routledge and Jones, A. 1999. Local Colour: Megalithic Kegan Paul, pp. 95–123. Architecture and Colour Symbolism in Nanoglou, S. 2009a. Representing People, Neolithic Arran. Oxford Journal of Constituting Worlds: Multiple ‘Neolithics’ Archaeology, 18(4):339–50. in the Southern Balkans. Documenta Kinnes, I. 1981. The Art of the Exceptional: Praehistorica, 36:283–97. The Statue-Menhir of Guernsey in Nanoglou, S. 2009b. The Materiality of Context. Archaeologia Atlantica, 3:9–33. Representation: A Preface. Journal of Kinnes, I. 1995. Statue-Menhirs and Allied Archaeological Method and Theory, 16:157– Representations in Northern France and 61. the Channel Islands. In: S. Casini, R.C. de Pedrotti, A. 1995. Le Statue Stele de Arco: La Marinis & A. Pedrotti, eds. Statue-Stele e Statuaria Antropomorfa Alpina nel III massiIncisinell’Europa dell’Età del Rame. Mellennio AC: Abbigliamento, Fibre Tessili

e Colore. Trento: Museo Civico di Riva del Sebire, H. 2005. The Archaeology and Early Garda. History of the Channel Islands. Stroud: Robb, J. 2009. People of Stone: Stelae, Tempus. Personhood, and Society in Prehistoric Smith, P. 2004. The Body of the Artisan: Art Europe. Journal of Archaeological Method and Experience in the Scientific Revolution. and Theory, 16:162–83. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Roberts, C. & Cox, M. 2007. The Impact of Tilley, C. 2004. The Materiality of Stone: Economic Intensification and Social Explorations in Landscape Phenomenology. Complexity on Human Health in Britain Oxford: Berg Publishers. from 6000 BP (Neolithic) and the Turner, B.S. 1984. The Body and Society: Introduction of Farming in the Exploration in Social Theory. Oxford: Basil Mid-Nineteenth Century. In: M. Cohen Blackwell. & G.M. Crane-Kramer, eds. Ancient Health: Skeletal Indicators and Economic Intensification. Gainesville: University Press of Florida, pp. 149–63. Scarre, C. 2009. Stones with Character: Animism, Agency and Megalithic BIOGRAPHICAL NOTE Monuments. In: B. O’Connor, G. Cooney & J. Chapman, eds. Materialitas: Working Sheila Kohring is an Affiliated Lecturer at Stone, Carving Identity. Oxford: Oxbow the University of Cambridge and Research Books, pp. 9–18. Scarre, C. 2010. Megaliths, Memory and the Associate at Clare College, Cambridge. Power of Stones. In: D. Calado, Her research interests include technologi- M. Baldia & M. Boulanger, eds. cal practices and the construction of social Monumental Questions: Prehistoric knowledge. Her work in the Channel Megaliths, Mounds and Enclosures. Oxford: – Islands was supported by the McDonald Archaeopress, pp. 91 96. Institute for Archaeological Research. She Schilling, C. 1993. The Body and Social Theory. London: SAGE. is currently involved in the Anthropology Schilling, C. 2005. The Body in Culture, of Prehistoric Health project sponsored by Technology and Society. London: SAGE. the Wellcome Trust. Schulting, R.J., Sebire, H. & Robb, J.E. 2010. On the Road to Paradis: New Insights Address: Department of Archaeology and from AMS Dating and Stable Isotopes at Le Déhus, Guernsey and the Channel Anthropology, Downing Street, University Islands Middle Neolithic. Oxford Journal of Cambridge, Cambridge, CB23DZ, of Archaeology, 29(2):149–73. UK. [email: [email protected]]

Matérialité, technologie et construction de l’intelligence du corps: perspective de l’île préhistorique de Guernesey (île anglo-normande)

Le rôle du corps dans la création du savoir social — comme catégorie ontologique et/ou esthétique — aété largement appliqué en théorie sociale. Toutes ces approches considèrent le corps comme un lieu de prédilection pour l’expérience et le savoir; il devient un instrument important pour créer des catégories ontologiques du soi et de la société. La matérialité des représentations humaines au sein des traditions artistiques peut alors être interprétée comme constituant un moyen de contextualisation et d’esthétisation du corps afin de produire une catégorie de savoir symbolique et structurel. Dans cet article nous examinons l’effet des choix de matéri- aux et des techniques de production lors de la représentation du corps humain sur la manière dont les sociétés classent et catégorisent le monde. Translation by Isabelle Gerges

Mots-clés: matérialité, corps, représentation, pierre, îles anglo-normandes

Materialität, Technologie und die Konstruktion des Körpers als Quelle von Erkenntnis: Eine Perspektive vom vorgeschichtlichen Guernsey, Kanalinseln

Die Rolle des menschlichen Körpers bei der Schaffung sozialen Wissens — als ontologische und/oder ästhetische Kategorie — fand in der Sozialtheorie stets Berücksichtigung. Bei all diesen Ansätzen wird der Körper als Ort der Erfahrungen und des Wissens angesehen; und er wird ein wichtiges Instrument der Erhebung ontologischer Kategorien des Selbst und der Gesellschaft. Die Materialität menschlicher Darstellungen in den Felskunst-Traditionen kann somit als Hilfsmittel für die Kontextualisierung und Ästhetisierung des Körpers angesehen werden, um eine symbolische und strukturelle Wissenskategorie zu schaffen. Dieser Beitrag untersucht den Effekt der Materialwahl und der Produktionstechniken bei der Abbildung des menschlichen Körpers in Hinblick darauf, wie Gesellschaften die Welt gliedern und kate- gorisieren. Translation by Heiner Schwarzberg

Stichworte: Materialität, Körper, Repräsentation, Stein, Kanalinseln