Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/
info/about/policies/terms.jsp
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content
in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship.
For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
University of New Mexico is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of Anthropological
Research.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 132.239.1.230 on Thu, 31 Dec 2015 18:29:09 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
BOOKREVIEWS 355
This content downloaded from 132.239.1.230 on Thu, 31 Dec 2015 18:29:09 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
356 OFANTHROPOLOGICAL
JOURNAL RESEARCH
architecture provides forthemanipulation andnegotiation oftraditional culture
among the Betsilio of Madagascar. Betsilio domestic space embodies and re-
the
produces metaphysical aspects ofthe the
largersocietythrough integration
of directionality,
height,anda complexzodiacal systemin theirarchitecture.
Thesuccessofthecontribution emerges in its specificity.Thediscussion does
notpretendto go beyondthelimitsof the dataor theoretical perspective.
Somewhat moreproblematical is Donley-Reid's contribution, in whichshe
a
presents counterargument to MarkHorton's(1987)proposalthatSwahili
settlementswerefoundedby indigenous Africans. Donley-Reid's solidappli-
cationof Anthony Giddens's conceptof "structuration" to Swahili architecture
is compromised by herassertionthatthe meanings andsettingsof historical
Swahilihousingare directlyapplicable to the interpretation of coastalEast
Africanarchitectural remainsdatingto the eightandninthcenturiesA.D.
Donley-Reid's description of Swahili cultureas a complexproduct of a millen-
niumof migration, integration withnativeEastAfrican populations, andslave
tradingdoesnotlendsupportto herdirecthistorical approach.
The arguments andanalysesby Richard Wilk(Chapter 4) andRoderick
Lawrence (Chapter 6) rest on firmerground.Ina comprehensive discussion
of variability
in Kekchihousing,Wilkproposesthathousingbe viewedas a
consumer goodthatis partof a largernexusof economic decisions.Hisem-
phasison economic decisionmaking in Kekchihousingprovidesa contrastto
the "formandsocialmeaning" perspective followed by severalotherauthors
in the volume.Lawrencepresentsa usefuldiscussion of the form-function
argument in his treatment of one hundred years changein Swissurban
of
housing. Lawrence notes an interesting trend in the gradual phasingoutof
domesticactivities inSwiss"collective " this
areas, attributing changeto official
housingregulations designed to neutralize the common areas.Especially val-
uableis hisutilization of multiple levelsof interpretation in hisexplanation of
domesticarchitecture.
Architecturalremainswithmuchgreatertimedepthareinvestigated inthe
threearchaeological studiesof domesticarchitecture andbuiltspace.These
includediscussions ofEarlyBronzeAgesettlements onCrete(Donald Sanders,
Chapter5), Greekcity-states(Michael Jameson,Chapter 7), andprehistoric
Peruvian household structure (Garth Bawden,Chapter 10).Eachcontribution
is comprehensive initstreatment ofthesubject matter,andtheauthors present
worthwhile discussions of use of spaceandstructural variability through time.
Butin the finalanalysis,it seemsthe archaeological approaches attempttoo
much,particularly whencompared to the analysesfoundin the ethnographic
case studies.
Lacunae inourknowledge of prehistoric architecture arenotthefaultofthe
authors.Questions surrounding construction andabandonment sequencesface
allarchaeologists whoinvestigate architectural contexts.Butwe shouldalso
accept the limitationsthat go with these lacunae.For example,in Sanders's
discussionof EarlyBronzeAge householdson Crete, we readthatmost walls
"standto onlya few courses (0.50-0.60 m)"(p. 54), andassignmentof room
This content downloaded from 132.239.1.230 on Thu, 31 Dec 2015 18:29:09 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
BOOKREVIEWS 357
This content downloaded from 132.239.1.230 on Thu, 31 Dec 2015 18:29:09 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
358 OFANTHROPOLOGICAL
JOURNAL RESEARCH
size. Nonetheless, Kent'scross-cultural approachis both an interestingand
innovativeinvestigation of spatialsegmentationanddifferentiation of activities.
The recurringmessage in this collectionof papersis that multiplelines of
inquirymust accompanyany understanding of the use of architecturalspace.
The interplaybetweeneconomy,landscape,meaning,tradition,resourceavail-
ability,andintercultural influencesdoes not lend itself towardany simpleex-
planations of architectural
patterningor variation.But such is the case with
any anthropological questionworthasking.As a whole, this corpusof papers
is certainlya valuablecontributionto researchonthecreation,use, andmeaning
of the builtenvironment.
REFERENCESCITED
Adams,W.,1987,ReviewofAnalyzingActivity Areas:AnEthnoarchaeological
Study
of theUseofSpacebySusanKent.HistoricalArchaeology21(1):105-7.
Carneiro,R., 1967,OntheRelationship
betweenSizeofPopulation
andComplexity
of SocialOrganization.
Southwestern of Anthropology
Journal 23(2):234-43.
Horton,M., 1987,TheSwahiliCorridor.Scientific
American(September):86-93.
Kent,S., 1984,Analyzing
ActivityAreas:AnEthnoarchaeological
Studyof theUse
of Space.Albuquerque: of
University New Mexico Press.
MikeAdler
Southern
Methodist
University
This content downloaded from 132.239.1.230 on Thu, 31 Dec 2015 18:29:09 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions