Abstract
This paper develops an argument for the agency of objects, looking at the effects objects have on people. Groups of related objects, such as pots or metal ornaments, create stylistic universes which affect producers and users of new objects, bound by the canons of style. For an object to be socially powerful in a recognized manner, the form of the object lays down certain rules of use which influence the sensory and emotional impacts of the object. Formal properties of artifacts are influenced by the genealogy of the object class, including historical continuities and changes, and also its perceived source. The forms of objects, the historical trajectories of the class of objects and their perceived sources combine to have social effects on people, shaping people as socially effective entities. Britain’s incorporation into the Roman Empire between 150 BC and AD 200 provides an excellent case study through which to look at the changing corpora of objects, which had continuities and changes in form, a set of subtle attributions of sources and a complex range of social effects.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bayley, J., and Butcher, S. (2004). Roman Brooches in Britain, A Technological and Typological Study Based on the Richborough Collection, The Society of Antiquaries of London, London.
Clarke, D. (1978). Analytical Archaeology, Methuen and Co. Ltd., London.
Creighton, J. (2000). Coins and Power in Late Iron Age Britain, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Fulford, M. (2001). Links with the past: Pervasive ‘ritual’ behavior in Roman Britain. Britannia 32: 199–218.
Gell, A. (1998). Art and Agency. An Anthropological Theory, Clarendon Press, Oxford.
Gosden, C. (2004). Archaeology and Colonialism. Cultural Contact from 5000 BC to the Present, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Gosden, C., and Lock, G. (2003). Becoming Roman on the Berkshire Downs: The evidence from Alfred’s Castle. Britannia 34: 65–80.
Haselgrove, C. (1997). Iron Age brooch deposition and chronology. In Gwilt, A., and Haselgrove, C. (eds.), Reconstructing Iron Age Societies. New Approaches to the British Iron Age, Oxbow Monographs 71, Oxford, pp. 51–72.
Hill, J. D. (1995). Ritual and Rubbish in the Iron Age of Wessex, British Archaeological Reports 242, Oxford.
Hill, J. D. (1997). ‘The end of one kind of body and the beginning of another kind of body’? Toilet instruments and ‘Romanization’ in southern England during the first century AD. In Gwilt, A., and Haselgrove, C. (eds.), Reconstructing Iron Age Societies. New Approaches to the British Iron Age, Oxbow Monographs 71, Oxford, pp. 96–107.
Hodder, I. (1979). Economic stress and material culture patterning. American Antiquity 44: 446–454.
Hodder, I. (1982). Symbols in Action, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Jope, M. (2000). Early Celtic Art in the British Isles, Clarendon Press, Oxford.
Jundi, S., and Hill, J. D. (1998). Brooches and identities in first century AD Britain: More than meets the eye? In Forcey, C., Hawthorne, J., and Witcher, R. (eds.), TRAC 97. Proceedings of the Seventh Annual Theoretical Roman Archaeology Conference, Oxbow Books, Oxford, pp. 125–137.
Laurence, R. (1999). The Roads of Roman Italy: Mobility and Cultural Change, Routledge, London.
Lawson, A. (2000). Potterne 1982–1985: Animal Husbandry in Later Prehistoric Wiltshire, Trust for Wessex Archaeology, Salisbury.
Miller, D. (2002). Coca-Cola: A black sweet drink from Trinidad. In Buchli, R. (ed.), The Material Culture Reader, Berg, Oxford, pp. 245–263.
Millett, M. (1990). The Romanization of Britain. An Essay in Archaeological Interpretation, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Mitchell, W. J. T. (1996). What do pictures really want? October 77: 71–82.
Needham, S., and Spence, T. (1997). Refuse and the formation of middens. Antiquity 71: 77–90.
Rush, P. (1997). Symbols, pottery and trade. In Meadows, K., Lemke, C., and Heron, J. (eds.), TRAC 96. Proceedings of the Sixth Annual Theoretical Roman Archaeology Conference, Oxbow Books, Oxford, pp. 55–64.
Sackett, J. R. (1977). The meaning of style in archaeology: A general model. American Antiquity 42: 369–380.
Smith, J. T. (1978). Villas as the key to social structure. In Todd, M. (ed.), Studies in the Romano-British Villa, Leicester University Press, Leicester, pp. 149–156.
Smith, J. T. (1987). The social structure of the Roman villa: Marshfield-Ironmongers Piece. Oxford Journal of Archaeology 6: 243–255.
Taylor, J. (2001). Rural society in Roman Britain. In James, S., and Millett, M. (eds.), Britons and Romans: Advancing an Archaeological Agenda, Council for British Archaeology Research Report 125, London, pp. 46–59.
Thomas, N. (1991). Entangled Objects: Exchange, Material Culture and Colonialism in the Pacific, Harvard University Press, Cambridge.
Tyers, P. (1996). Roman Pottery in Britain, Batsford, London.
Willis, S. (1997). Samian: Beyond dating. In Meadows, K., Lemke, C., and Heron, J. (eds.), TRAC 96. Proceedings of the Sixth Annual Theoretical Roman Archaeology Conference, Oxbow Books, Oxford, pp. 38–54.
Willis, S. (1998). Samian pottery in Britain: Exploring its distribution and archaeological potential. The Archaeological Journal 155: 82–133.
Woolf, G. (1997). Beyond Romans and Natives. World Archaeology 28: 339–350.
Woolf, G. (1998). Becoming Roman: The Origins of Provincial Civilization in Gaul, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Gosden, C. What Do Objects Want?. J Archaeol Method Theory 12, 193–211 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10816-005-6928-x
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10816-005-6928-x