Material Religion

The Journal of Objects, Art and Belief

ISSN: 1743-2200 (Print) 1751-8342 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rfmr20

Religion, Material Culture and Archaeology

Timothy Insoll
To cite this article: Timothy Insoll (2015) Religion, Material Culture and Archaeology, Material
Religion, 11:3, 407-408, DOI: 10.1080/17432200.2015.1082743
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17432200.2015.1082743

Published online: 10 Feb 2016.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 1

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=rfmr20
Download by: [The University of Manchester Library]

Date: 16 February 2016, At: 01:55

religion, material culture

and archaeology
Julian Droogan, 2013
London: Bloomsbury

Reviewed by Timothy Insoll

University of Manchester

Downloaded by [The University of Manchester Library] at 01:55 16 February 2016

DOI: 10.1080/17432200.2015.1082743

Droogans volume forms part of the

Bloomsbury Advances in Religious Studies
series which is an interesting collection
ranging across broader subjects such as
that of the book being reviewed through
to more specialized topics. It is also
multi-disciplinary in focus, and Droogans
book sits within this in combining both
archaeological and studies in religion (5)
approaches to religion and material culture.
Discussion is presented over five chapters
and it is regrettable that not a single
illustration is included. It is well written but
does on occasion read like a thesis through
the over-emphasis placed upon telling
the reader what is going to be discussed.
This could have been edited down thereby
freeing more room for the primary argument.
Greater use could also have been made of
subheadings.
The aims of the book are described as
exploring and explaining
the problem of religion in archaeological
theory and method over the past century,
to use this as the basis to assess the
viability of a contemporary materiality of
religion and to begin to chart some of its
characteristics in a preliminary fashion.
(viii.)

407

As such it is not the first study to attempt

this, and many archaeologists would now
accept that religion, even if not always
defined specifically as such, forms a
potential component of past lives, a change
apparent even over a decade (cf. Insoll
2004).

Chapter 1 sets the scene and starts by

stressing the importance of materiality to religions and religious life but how scholars of
religion have often treated this as something
apart from the spiritual. A valid point, as is
the assertion that studies in religion have
neglected (or misused) archaeology and
archaeology has (generally) neglected wider
studies in religion. Archaeology is defined,
but as the book seems to be primarily
targeted at the studies in religion community
this would have benefited from guiding the
reader to existing definitions. Equally, the
Material Culture section (1314) is somewhat under-referenced and provides a rather
minimal review.
Chapter 2 examines the relationship
between religion, material culture and
archaeology and the chapter contents,
though described a mere four pages before
(1617), are further introduced over another
two and a half pages (2123). Again, the
aversion to material culture in studies in religion is rightly indicated. This is succeeded
by a review of relevant research and good
critical points are made about, for example,
the work of Eliade and Mueller (29). The
split between archaeology and studies in
religion is well dealt with, though equally
there are other disciplinary pools drawn
upon by both disciplines that could figure
more prominently in the discussion, such as
history of art and social anthropology. Some
of the material covered is also fairly well
trodden ground, such as the absence of the
use of the term religion by archaeologists
in preference to ritual (e.g. 4750), though
in Droogans favor, he treats these issues
at a greater length than others generally
have done so far. It would also be pertinent
to note that archaeological meaning and
interpretation are also constrained through
context, and not just the object itself as is
seemingly implied, perhaps unintentionally,
by the discussion (63).

Book Reviews

related to a single secondary example when

there exists a significant volume of literature
that could have been drawn upon to make
the example, and this chapter, much more
effective.
Finally, Chapter 5 presents concluding
thoughts on Archaeology and the Materiality of Religion. Droogan draws upon Gell in
considering agency as significant, which is
certainly important, and a couple of useful
South Asian examples are included (162,
163). However, from an archaeological perspective it has been superseded by recent
engagements with material entanglement,
bundling, and relational archaeology (e.g.
Hodder 2012). Overall, the strength of the
book lies in indicating that materiality is
integral to religiosity not its opposite (171),
but the conclusions do not really indicate
how archaeologists can more fully explore
this or how studies in religion could more
fully integrate archaeology. To achieve this,
a lengthier, reconfigured and empirically rich
study is required, and perhaps the task of
addressing this subject is now just too vast.

Brck, J., 2005. Experiencing the past? The

development of a phenomenological archaeology
in British prehistory. Archaeological Dialogues, 12,
4572.

Volume 11
Issue 3

reference

Hodder, I., 2012. Entangled. An archaeology of the

relationships between humans and things. Oxford:
Wiley-Blackwell.
Insoll, T., 2004. Archaeology, ritual, religion.
London: Routledge.

408

Material Religion

Downloaded by [The University of Manchester Library] at 01:55 16 February 2016

Chapter 3 focuses upon what Droogan

terms Archaeologies of Religion. A review
of different approaches to religion by
archaeologists working from different theoretical perspectives is provided Marxist,
functionalist, processual, post-processual
for example. This is lengthier than other
treatments of this subject, though the
discussion could be better linked to existing
critiques in places. Nonetheless, it is a
useful review. Chapter 4 explores by way of
a case study Sacred and Profane Landscapes with particular emphasis placed
upon phenomenological approaches. The
opening statement to the chapter is weak,
as it suggests that examining ancient landscapes constitutes this phenomenological
approach (109). Ancient landscapes can
be examined for myriad purposes, many
of which are wholly unconcerned with
phenomenological, experiential dimensions. Religion is also not prominent in
these studies, as Droogan recognizes, but
this absence does somewhat weaken the
choice of this material for a case study.
It would have been preferable to apply a
phenomenological perspective to the interpretation/presentation of a primary body
of data, perhaps drawn from Droogans
apparent South Asian specialization, rather
than examining the landscape research
completed by others, some of which might
never have been intended as phenomenological. There is also, again, an absence of
some key references, as with Brcks (2005)
forceful critique of the phenomenological
approach in archaeology. Similarly, the
material structuration of social life (144) is