p. 4 “It is from physics, and especially quantum theory, that the need to mobilize all possible means for understanding how things and individuals are entangled has emerged. In so doing, the concept of ‘intra-action’ introduced by Karen Barad, is definitely a more dynamic way of defining forms of relationality (and causality) in the process of creating the phenomena of materialization… three main lines of thought that have considered relationaity as pivotal for supporting the reconstruction of ancient phenomena based on archaeological data …the focus on rationality became an ‘ontological turn’ that theorizes on ‘what it means to be, and how we come to be, human in relation to other things, organisms, materials, substances and phenomena.”,,,
Social Network Analysis (SNA) social networks in which the modes are individuals, and the links represent their forms of relationship
Action-Network Theory (ANT) analytical syummetries between human and nonhuman actants
Entanglement: forms of relationship (dependence) existing between humans and things (and vice a versa) Engtanlement – HT +TT+TH+HH
p. 5 It is through a relational approach that the Cartesian dichotomy between the mental and the material can be overcome, because religious beliefs are a by-product of the relationship between ideal and practical domains of human cognition and are physically engraved on the material culture.. we have to ensilage a theoretical framework that is based on forms of nonverbal communication systems in which all involved elements can serve as nodes, through the use of connecting ties; the nodes form a network that establishes the meaning of the maerial culture concerned with religious practices. The elements involved in the materialisation of the network are diverse and combine a patchwork of sensory experiences (ie viaul, tactual, sound, smell, taste) that are interconnected by complex forms of ritual [practices (ie ritualzation) shared by the participants. For the involved cues to be both functional and meaningful, the context, the participants prior knowledge and the social practice involving human and nonhuman elements, appear as central for a coherent and powerful communication of the meaning of materiality… it is important to emphasize that ritual acts must be interprested as part of a broader semantic framework within which the significance of the action is dependent upon the place in which the ritual act is enacted and through its relationship with the context in which the action is performed.”
p. 6 This, the ideological power of ritual acts is produced by the creation of networks of elements (eg votive objects, icons, ceremonial architecture, sacred food and animals) that gain their meaning only when they are part of a performance context and through their entanglement with human beings.
About