This essay explores some of the ways in which archeology and possibility studies can enrich each other’s understanding of time, agency and materiality in human behavior. It discusses the implications of linear conceptions of time for our perception of human pasts and futures, and argues for the adoption of rhythm as an alternative mode of inquiry that is capable of liberating the past from our hindsight and making space for the possible as a generative dimension of cultural practice.
AdamB. (1994). Perceptions of time. In IngoldT. (Ed.), Companion encyclopedia of anthropology (pp. 503–526). Routledge.
2.
BarlettaV. (2020). Rhythm: Form and dispossession. University of Chicago Press.
3.
DaraganM.PolinS. (2021). Funeralkultur der Thraker und Skythen des 7. bis 5. Jahrhunderts v. Chr. In TeleagaE. (Ed.), On the history of development of the excavations methodology for large Scythian kurgans: Researching the burial mounds and seeking the funeral feasts (pp. 1–40). Marie Leidorf.
4.
EdensorT. (2010). Geographies of rhythm: Nature, place, mobilities and bodies. Ashgate.
5.
FabianJ. (1983). Time and the other: How anthropology makes its object. Columbia University Press.
6.
FoucaultM. (1988). Politics, philosophy, culture: Interviews and other writings, 1977–1984. Routledge.
7.
GlăveanuV. P. (2016). Rhythm. In GlăveanuV. P.TanggaardL.WegenerC. (Eds.), Creativity: A new vocabulary (pp. 129–136). Palgrave Macmillan.
8.
GlăveanuV. P. (2020). The possible: A sociocultural theory. Oxford University Press.
9.
GuyerJ. I.BurtonM. L.DoveM. R.CarpenterC.EmberC. R.GudemanS.HansenK. T.HillM. H.HuntR. C.RichardsP.StrathernM.WhiteD. R. (1988). The multiplication of labor: Historical methods in the study of gender and agricultural change in modern Africa [and comments and reply]. Current Anthropology, 29(2), 247–272.
10.
HodderI. (1989). The meanings of things: Material culture and symbolic expression. Unwin Hyman.
WengrowD.GraeberD. (2015). Farewell to the ‘childhood of man’: Ritual, seasonality, and the origins of inequality. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, 21(3), 597–619.
