Geometric ornament as material knowledge: Ethnogeometric structures of spatial cognition
Journal of Material Culture, 2026 (AHCI, SSCI, Scopus)
- Yayın Türü: Makale / Tam Makale
- Basım Tarihi: 2026
- Doi Numarası: 10.1177/13591835261497175
- Dergi Adı: Journal of Material Culture
- Derginin Tarandığı İndeksler: Arts and Humanities Citation Index (AHCI), Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI), Scopus, IBZ Online, Anthropological Literature, Art Source, Geobase, Index Islamicus, MLA - Modern Language Association Database, Political Science Complete, MLA International Bibliography, Political Science Abstract (IPSA), Academic Search Ultimate (EBSCO), Business Source Ultimate (EBSCO), Humanities Source Ultimate (EBSCO), Sociology Source Ultimate (EBSCO)
- Anahtar Kelimeler: ethnogeometry, geometric ornament, Material knowledge, philosophy of culture, spatial cognition
- Ankara Üniversitesi Adresli: Evet
Özet
This article proposes a method for analysing recurring geometric relationships in Chalcolithic Botai material culture in northern Kazakhstan. Ornamented artefacts, dwelling architecture and settlement layout are examined without assuming a single symbolic code or historical continuity. The methodology integrates ethnogeometry, Material Engagement Theory, the enactive signification hypothesis and Peircean and material semiotics. Analysis proceeds through four levels of inference, from observable material features to culturally specific interpretations. Results show that comparable geometric relationships are materialised differently through production, object orientation, bodily interaction, movement and spatial organisation. The unit of comparison is not a motif but a geometric relationship arising within a specific material practice. Formal similarity alone cannot establish ritual or cosmological meaning. Comparative cases from Sakha culture and Çatalhöyük are used asymmetrically to distinguish evidence-based conclusions from speculation. The article therefore treats geometric ornament as a form of embodied material knowledge while defining explicit evidential limits for archaeological interpretation.